On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 02:38:52PM +0100, Marc Espie wrote: > On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 02:35:28PM +0100, Solene Rapenne wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 01:18:53PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > On 2019/11/01 19:16, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > > Ted Unangst <t...@tedunangst.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > > > > What about all the other users who aren't in staff? > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the approach is right. Push non-interactive down. > > > > > > > > > > The same then for src build user? > > > > > > > > Well, that's different. Most of us building the src tree are waiting > > > > eagerly for it to finish aren't we? > > > > > > That's the same for ports building! > > > > > > > if you don't do anything else than compiling ports, that shouldn't be > > slower. > > If you are doing something else (GUI user, web server, community server > > with people connected doing IRC) , then you don't get angry due to > > unresponsive system. > > > > Lowering staff priority would only help the one user case. > > I agree with solene on that one. > > This is actually useful even if you're just building ports, because > you get a more responsive text-editor and stuff like that which is useful > when you're fixing things that broke while dpb is still going. > > I see a noticeable difference in vim showing me syntax coloring correctly > while dpb is running. > > Source is somewhat different. make build/release is sequential by nature, > as you can't really fix a part while something else is still building. >
any other people noticed a difference with the priority change?
