[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Paralizing configure
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: Paralizing configure |
Date: |
Tue, 08 Feb 2011 12:51:20 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Thunderbird/3.1.7 |
On 02/08/11 12:46, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> external tools like that or 'make' are pretty much dead in the water
> with current Autoconf implementation because we do not have any idea of
> what shell variables are needed in the environment for the next tests.
Oh yes, I quite agree, it would require a real change to
the Autoconf implementation, and people who write tests
would have to be disciplined about their dependencies.
The default would be sequential, for backward compatibility,
but if someone goes to the work to declaring their dependencies,
we could assume that it could be slotted into a make -j
or whatever.
None of this stuff would be a breeze, of course.
> (Not to speak of 32K environment+command line length on MSYS.)
We'd have to stay sequential in limited environments like that.
That's OK.
- Paralizing configure, Marian Marinov, 2011/02/08
- Re: Paralizing configure, Paul Eggert, 2011/02/08
- Re: Paralizing configure, Ralf Wildenhues, 2011/02/08
- Re: Paralizing configure,
Paul Eggert <=
- Re: Paralizing configure, Marian Marinov, 2011/02/08
- Re: Paralizing configure, Miles Bader, 2011/02/08
- Re: Paralizing configure, Ralf Corsepius, 2011/02/08
- Re: Paralizing configure, Miles Bader, 2011/02/08
- Re: Paralizing configure, Peter Rosin, 2011/02/09
- Re: Paralizing configure, Miles Bader, 2011/02/09
- Re: Paralizing configure, Peter Rosin, 2011/02/09
- Re: Paralizing configure, Ralf Wildenhues, 2011/02/10
- Re: Paralizing configure, Ralf Wildenhues, 2011/02/14
Re: Paralizing configure, Bob Friesenhahn, 2011/02/09