Peter Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 2006-Jan-21 14:30:57 -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
Yes, but portupgrade and friends already do most of that, so they can
upgrade stuff in order.
Actually, they rely on there being an up-to-date INDEX file and build
their own dependency
[ Cc trim a bit ]
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 08:53:11PM -0500 I heard the voice of
Kris Kennaway, and lo! it spake thus:
In order to do better you either have to:
This is something that may be easier to:
3) Implement in portupgrade or portmanager or some such higher-level
tool in a language
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 10:07:39AM -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
[ Cc trim a bit ]
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 08:53:11PM -0500 I heard the voice of
Kris Kennaway, and lo! it spake thus:
In order to do better you either have to:
This is something that may be easier to:
3) Implement
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 03:23:21PM -0500 I heard the voice of
Kris Kennaway, and lo! it spake thus:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 10:07:39AM -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
This is something that may be easier to:
3) Implement in portupgrade or portmanager or some such higher-level
tool
On Sat, 2006-Jan-21 14:30:57 -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 03:23:21PM -0500 I heard the voice of
Kris Kennaway, and lo! it spake thus:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 10:07:39AM -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
This is something that may be easier to:
3) Implement in
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 08:09:56AM +1100 I heard the voice of
Peter Jeremy, and lo! it spake thus:
Given that a port's dependency tree can depend on the options it is
invoked with, it would be nicer if the dependency tree was generated
dynamically, rather than pulled out of the latest INDEX
Wesley Shields [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think he is trying to get at a scenario where WRKDIR is on a seperate
disk from the one /usr/ports is on.
There is no performance advantage in doing that. I can only see two
possible reasons for pointing WRKDIRPREFIX to another disk:
- insufficient
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 05:32:58PM -0500, Gary Thorpe wrote:
Ashok Shrestha wrote:
I mounted part of RAM as such:
mdmfs -s 500m md /mnt
Then put WRKDIRPREFIX=/path/to/md in /etc/make.conf.
It substantially reduces compile time by about 5-10 times.
Thanx to all ur
Gary Thorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This effectively means that you cannot take advantage of SMP to
compile FreeBSD's ports collection. That sounds like a big
limitation...especially for people trying to speed up bulk builds.
We cannot be held responsible for race conditions in the Makefiles
From: =?ISO646-US?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=3Frgrav?= [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gary Thorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This effectively means that you cannot take advantage of SMP to
compile FreeBSD's ports collection. That sounds like a big
limitation...especially for people trying to speed up bulk builds.
We
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 11:25:33AM -0600, Sergey Babkin wrote:
From: =?ISO646-US?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=3Frgrav?= [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gary Thorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This effectively means that you cannot take advantage of SMP to
compile FreeBSD's ports collection. That sounds like a big
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 11:49:29AM -0500, Gary Thorpe wrote:
-j is not safe to use with port builds since many ported software
contain race conditions in the build.
Kris
This effectively means that you cannot take advantage of SMP to compile
FreeBSD's ports collection. That sounds like
On Fri, 2006-Jan-20 14:47:00 -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 11:49:29AM -0500, Gary Thorpe wrote:
-j is not safe to use with port builds since many ported software
contain race conditions in the build.
Kris
This effectively means that you cannot take advantage of SMP
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 07:52:20AM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote:5C
IMHO, the biggest problem (as des pointed out) is that there's nothing
to prevent two makes attempting to build the same port (this can
easily happen when both ports A and B depend on port C). One possible
solution would be to
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 11:25:33AM -0600, Sergey Babkin wrote:
From: =?ISO646-US?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=3Frgrav?= [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gary Thorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This effectively means that you cannot take advantage of SMP to
compile FreeBSD's ports collection.
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 04:54:33PM -0500, Sergey Babkin wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 11:25:33AM -0600, Sergey Babkin wrote:
From: =?ISO646-US?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=3Frgrav?= [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gary Thorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This effectively means that you
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kris Kennaway
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 11:47 AM
To: Gary Thorpe
Cc: Wesley Shields; Ashok Shrestha; Brandon Flowers; Kris
Kennaway; Mike Meyer; freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav
Subject: Re: speed up port compiling using RAM (tmpfs
-Erling Sm?rgrav
Subject: Re: speed up port compiling using RAM (tmpfs) ???
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 11:49:29AM -0500, Gary Thorpe wrote:
-j is not safe to use with port builds since many ported software
contain race conditions in the build.
Kris
This effectively means
On Fri, 2006-Jan-20 16:54:33 -0500, Sergey Babkin wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
It's harder than that, because you need to impose dependency
information and mutual exclusion between different makes. e.g. they
can't both be compiling the same port at the same time, which will
happen if you just
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 04:54:33PM -0500, Sergey Babkin wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 11:25:33AM -0600, Sergey Babkin wrote:
From: =?ISO646-US?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=3Frgrav?= [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gary Thorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 08:36:17PM -0500, Sergey Babkin wrote:
If (as I said) you impose the correct dependency information.
Currently there is no such information provided.
Ah, so we don't have any reliable information about dependencies
between the ports either (not just between files
Ashok Shrestha [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am curious to know if there is a way to compile a port such as X11
or KDE faster.
I know in Gentoo, you can mount a part of RAM and compile in that.
This substantially decreases the compile time. Reference:
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Will using a swap-backed disk change anything?
Not really.
How about the best way to configure things to use two disks for the
compile?
I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve. Unlike the base system,
the ports tree does not use separate source and
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 05:54:02PM +0100, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Will using a swap-backed disk change anything?
Not really.
How about the best way to configure things to use two disks for the
compile?
I'm not sure what you are trying to
I mounted part of RAM as such:
mdmfs -s 500m md /mnt
Then put WRKDIRPREFIX=/path/to/md in /etc/make.conf.
It substantially reduces compile time by about 5-10 times.
Thanx to all ur replies.
-Ashok Shrestha
On 1/19/06, Wesley Shields [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at
Hi,
I am curious to know if there is a way to compile a port such as X11
or KDE faster.
I know in Gentoo, you can mount a part of RAM and compile in that.
This substantially decreases the compile time. Reference:
http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_Speeding_up_portage_with_tmpfs
Does anyone know how to
On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 02:45:30AM -0500, Ashok Shrestha wrote:
Hi,
I am curious to know if there is a way to compile a port such as X11
or KDE faster.
I know in Gentoo, you can mount a part of RAM and compile in that.
This substantially decreases the compile time. Reference:
日曜日 15 1月 2006 16:45、Ashok Shrestha さんは書きました:
Hi,
I am curious to know if there is a way to compile a port such as X11
or KDE faster.
I know in Gentoo, you can mount a part of RAM and compile in that.
This substantially decreases the compile time. Reference:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ashok Shrestha wrote:
Hi,
I am curious to know if there is a way to compile a port such as X11
or KDE faster.
I know in Gentoo, you can mount a part of RAM and compile in that.
This substantially decreases the compile time. Reference:
you can mount a small memory filesystem think it's called mbfs or
something and change the work dir to that then you should be able to
compile KDE using ram instead of the HD
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ashok Shrestha wrote:
Hi,
I am curious to know if there is a way to
On Sunday 15 January 2006 18:15, Ashok Shrestha wrote:
I am curious to know if there is a way to compile a port such as X11
or KDE faster.
I know in Gentoo, you can mount a part of RAM and compile in that.
This substantially decreases the compile time. Reference:
31 matches
Mail list logo
