On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 01:58:17PM +0000, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 02:30:53PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > I still believe that you should not file such bugs, I still fail to > > see how it improves debian, as if we really need to build more packages > > at the same time, we could run many sbuild instances on the same > > machine. > > It isn't about building more than one package, it is about building one > package faster. And I really think that even for mid-size packages this > can make a lot of difference. Especially if you have a processor like my > Core Duo 1.2 GHz ULV which isn't really fast to begin with. > > For multi-processor buildds more than one sbuild might indeed be better > and more robust than using dpkg-buildpackage -j, but for developers' > desktops and notebooks I really think it is a nice thing to have. > > And I fail to see the harm done by filing wishlist bugs about that. Some build systems are just fucked up beyond repair wrt parallel build, and well, there's often nothing the maintainer can reasonably do. I'm totally okay with wishlist bugs, but when there is no chances to see them fixed, then well don't file them, it just pollutes the BTS. Of course, wishlist with patches that fixes reliably an upstream build system to support parallel builds is _always_ a good idea. Also note that many packages (like gcc or the glibc) use parallel builds already. I'm very aware that it helps. My point is merely that the build system of a program isn't really the most urgent fix. Such a fix helps only developer's life. I appreciate when other developers come with a patch, and not open long standing bugs on the BTS for the fun of it. That said, I believe most of the packages I package are autoconf/cmake based or are small enough so that a parallel build is useless, so I probably wont be annoyed here. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgp6CWBjHbTWN.pgp
Description: PGP signature