On Sat, 26 May 2007, M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Benjamin Lutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Friday 25 May 2007 01:22:21 Alexey Mikhailov wrote:
: [...]
: 2. As I said before initial subject of this project was Distributed
: audit daemon. But after some
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
I have been thinking a lot about looking for speed increases for make
index and pkg_version and things like that. So for example, in
pkg_version, it calls make -V PKGNAME for every installed package. Now
make -V
Matthew Seaman wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
I have been thinking a lot about looking for speed increases for make
index and pkg_version and things like that. So for example, in
pkg_version, it calls make -V PKGNAME for every installed
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
I have been thinking a lot about looking for speed increases for make
index and pkg_version and things like that. So for example, in
pkg_version, it calls make -V PKGNAME for every installed package. Now
make -V PKGNAME should be a speedy operation, but the
Hartmut Brandt wrote:
Having done a great deal of rewriting of make some two years ago I can
tell you that even a small change to make is a tough job testing-wise:
run all the combinations of !-j and -j N on all architectures and run
the change through the port-building cluster. That's a
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
Hartmut Brandt wrote:
Having done a great deal of rewriting of make some two years ago I can
tell you that even a small change to make is a tough job testing-wise:
run all the combinations of !-j and -j N on all architectures and run
the change through the
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
I have been thinking a lot about looking for speed increases for make
index and pkg_version and things like that. So for example, in
pkg_version, it calls make -V PKGNAME for every installed package. Now
make -V PKGNAME should be a speedy operation, but the
Ivan Voras wrote:
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
I have been thinking a lot about looking for speed increases for make
index and pkg_version and things like that. So for example, in
pkg_version, it calls make -V PKGNAME for every installed package. Now
make -V PKGNAME should be a speedy
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 03:52:16PM -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
I have been thinking a lot about looking for speed increases for make
index and pkg_version and things like that. So for example, in
pkg_version, it calls make -V PKGNAME for every installed
On Monday 28 May 2007 03:43, you wrote:
Maybe I should look at the inner workings of cmake and gmake. Maybe
they have some good ideas. However having looked through the source
code of make, and also looking at the cvs logs, it does seem to be well
written. The only possibility I see of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Ivan Voras wrote:
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
I have been thinking a lot about looking for speed increases for make
index and pkg_version and things like that. So for example, in
pkg_version, it calls make -V PKGNAME for every installed
On Mon, 28 May 2007, David Naylor wrote:
On Monday 28 May 2007 03:43, you wrote:
Maybe I should look at the inner workings of cmake and gmake. Maybe
they have some good ideas. However having looked through the source
code of make, and also looking at the cvs logs, it does seem to be well
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hartmut Brandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
1. make and its sub-makes for a) reading the file; b) parsing the file
(note that .if and .for processing is done while parsing); c) processing
targets.
Make and submakes have been gone over already. See URL:
Mike Meyer wrote:
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hartmut Brandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
1. make and its sub-makes for a) reading the file; b) parsing the file
(note that .if and .for processing is done while parsing); c) processing
targets.
Make and submakes have been gone over already. See URL:
Garrett Cooper wrote:
Mike Meyer wrote:
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hartmut Brandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
1. make and its sub-makes for a) reading the file; b) parsing the file
(note that .if and .for processing is done while parsing); c) processing
targets.
Make and submakes have been gone over
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
Ivan Voras wrote:
As long as far-out ideas are being discussed, how about caching such
information (including dependenices) in a file (I'd call it a database
but then I'd had to start a holy war :) ) so it's calculated only once,
preferably on the portsnap /
Mike Meyer wrote:
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hartmut Brandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
1. make and its sub-makes for a) reading the file; b) parsing the file
(note that .if and .for processing is done while parsing); c) processing
targets.
Make and submakes have been gone over already. See URL:
On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 11:34:24AM -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 03:52:16PM -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
I have been thinking a lot about looking for speed increases for make
index and pkg_version and things like that. So
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hartmut Brandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
Mike Meyer wrote:
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hartmut Brandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
1. make and its sub-makes for a) reading the file; b) parsing the file
(note that .if and .for processing is done while parsing); c) processing
Resent to freebsd-hackers@:
Greetings, all.
On 2007.05.22, at 03:57, Ivan Voras wrote:
Hi!
I've had the opportunity to talk to Adam Martin, Marcel Moolenaar and
Peter Wemm about making GPT bootable, but not all of them at the same
time, so I'd like this thread to be the meeting point on the
Correct me if I wrong. Don't you missed the fact that chdir(2) changes
process wide attribute?
Though it's easy to fix with -C option.
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 03:52:16PM -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith
wrote:
I have been thinking a lot
Roman Divacky wrote:
On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 11:34:24AM -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 03:52:16PM -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
I have been thinking a lot about looking for speed increases for make
index and pkg_version and
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
Roman Divacky wrote:
On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 11:34:24AM -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 03:52:16PM -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith
wrote:
I have been thinking a lot about looking for speed increases for
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 03:30:48PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
That said, I'll ask this out in the open: am I the only one who sees the
benefit of GNU make in regards to this? There's a lot of built-in
functions in GNU make which could help in regards to ports. I have no
qualms with
24 matches
Mail list logo
