[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#199782: marked as done (gcc-snapshot: Is there any reason why build doesn't use -j?)



Your message dated Sun, 06 Jul 2003 14:32:43 -0400
with message-id <E19ZEJX-0003KH-00@auric.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#199782: fixed in gcc-snapshot 20030706-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 3 Jul 2003 03:45:20 +0000
>From ianw@gelato.unsw.edu.au Wed Jul 02 22:45:17 2003
Return-path: <ianw@gelato.unsw.edu.au>
Received: from note.orchestra.cse.unsw.edu.au [129.94.242.24] 
	by master.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 19Xv25-0000vz-00; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 22:45:17 -0500
Received: From tartufi.gelato.unsw.edu.au ([129.94.173.229])
	(for <submit@bugs.debian.org>) (for <ianw@gelato.unsw.edu.au>) By
	tone With Smtp ; Thu, 3 Jul 2003 13:45:12 +1000 
From: Ian Wienand <ianw@gelato.unsw.edu.au>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 13:45:20 +1000
Message-Id: <[🔎] 1030703034512.12449@cse.unsw.edu.au>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2806970125878325248=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: gcc-snapshot: Is there any reason why build doesn't use -j?
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.16
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-12.3 required=4.0
	tests=BAYES_20,HAS_PACKAGE,PATCH_UNIFIED_DIFF
	autolearn=ham version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_06_27
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_06_27 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)

This is a multi-part MIME message sent by reportbug.

--===============2806970125878325248==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Package: gcc-snapshot
Version: 20030531-2
Severity: wishlist

Is there any particular reason why the Debian build  
process doesn't use -j for multiple jobs?  Attached is a patch 
that keeps my machine busy and cuts the build time a bit.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: ia64
Kernel: Linux tartufi 2.5.72uni  #17 SMP Wed Jul 2 16:03:07 EST 2003 ia64
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C

Versions of packages gcc-snapshot depends on:
ii  binutils                 2.14.90.0.4-0.1 The GNU assembler, linker and bina
ii  libc6.1                  2.3.1-17        GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii  xlibs                    4.2.1-8         X Window System client libraries
ii  zlib1g                   1:1.1.4-13      compression library - runtime

-- no debconf information


--===============2806970125878325248==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="njobs.patch"

--- gcc-snapshot-20030531-orig/debian/rules2	2003-07-03 12:27:11.000000000 +1000
+++ gcc-snapshot-20030531/debian/rules2	2003-07-03 12:09:01.000000000 +1000
@@ -16,6 +16,10 @@
 IP	= install -p -m 755	# Install program
 IS	= install -p -m 755	# Install script
 
+#number of jobs to run for build
+NJOBS   = $(shell if [ -f /proc/cpuinfo ] ; then echo `cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep 'processor' | wc -l` ; else echo 1 ; fi)
+
+
 # the recipient for the test summaries. Send with: debian/rules mail-summary
 S_EMAIL = gcc@packages.debian.org gcc-testresults@gcc.gnu.org $(shell whoami)
 #S_EMAIL = gcc@packages.debian.org $(shell whoami)
@@ -227,7 +231,7 @@
 	( \
 	  set +e; \
 	  PATH=$(PWD)/bin:$$PATH \
-	    $(MAKE) -C $(builddir) bootstrap-lean \
+	    $(MAKE) -C $(builddir) -j$(NJOBS) bootstrap-lean \
 		CC="$(CC)" CFLAGS="$(CFLAGS)" \
 		BOOT_CFLAGS="$(BOOT_CFLAGS)" LDFLAGS="$(LDFLAGS)" \
 		STAGE1_CFLAGS="$(STAGE1_CFLAGS)" \
@@ -240,7 +244,7 @@
 	( \
 	  set +e; \
 	  PATH=$(PWD)/bin:$$PATH \
-	    $(MAKE) -C $(builddir) \
+	    $(MAKE) -C -j$(NJOBS) $(builddir) \
 		LANGUAGES="$(shell echo $(enabled_languages)|tr -s ' ' ',')" \
 		CC="$(CC)" CFLAGS="$(CFLAGS)" \
 		BOOT_CFLAGS="$(BOOT_CFLAGS)" LDFLAGS="$(LDFLAGS)" \
@@ -262,11 +266,11 @@
   ifeq ($(with_shared_ada),yes)
 	LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$(builddir)/gcc/ada \
 	PATH=$(PWD)/bin:$$PATH \
-		$(MAKE) -C $(builddir)/gcc gnatlib-shared gnatlib gnattools
+		$(MAKE) -j$(NJOBS) -C $(builddir)/gcc gnatlib-shared gnatlib gnattools
   else
 	LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$(builddir)/gcc/ada \
 	PATH=$(PWD)/bin:$$PATH \
-		$(MAKE) -C $(builddir)/gcc gnatlib gnattools
+		$(MAKE) -j$(NJOBS) -C $(builddir)/gcc gnatlib gnattools
   endif
 endif
 

--===============2806970125878325248==--

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 199782-close) by bugs.debian.org; 6 Jul 2003 18:34:34 +0000
>From katie@auric.debian.org Sun Jul 06 13:34:34 2003
Return-path: <katie@auric.debian.org>
Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] 
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 19ZELK-00070o-00; Sun, 06 Jul 2003 13:34:34 -0500
Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 19ZEJX-0003KH-00; Sun, 06 Jul 2003 14:32:43 -0400
From: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>
To: 199782-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.34 $
Subject: Bug#199782: fixed in gcc-snapshot 20030706-1
Message-Id: <E19ZEJX-0003KH-00@auric.debian.org>
Sender: Archive Administrator <katie@auric.debian.org>
Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2003 14:32:43 -0400
Delivered-To: 199782-close@bugs.debian.org

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
gcc-snapshot, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

gcc-snapshot_20030706-1.diff.gz
  to pool/main/g/gcc-snapshot/gcc-snapshot_20030706-1.diff.gz
gcc-snapshot_20030706-1.dsc
  to pool/main/g/gcc-snapshot/gcc-snapshot_20030706-1.dsc
gcc-snapshot_20030706-1_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/gcc-snapshot/gcc-snapshot_20030706-1_i386.deb
gcc-snapshot_20030706.orig.tar.gz
  to pool/main/g/gcc-snapshot/gcc-snapshot_20030706.orig.tar.gz



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 199782@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> (supplier of updated gcc-snapshot package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Sun,  6 Jul 2003 10:29:35 +0200
Source: gcc-snapshot
Binary: gcc-snapshot
Architecture: source i386
Version: 20030706-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian GCC maintainers <debian-gcc@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>
Description: 
 gcc-snapshot - A SNAPSHOT of the The GNU Compiler Collection.
Closes: 195899 199782
Changes: 
 gcc-snapshot (20030706-1) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * CVS 20030706, taken from HEAD.
   * Set STAGE1_CFLAGS to -g -O2 on mips/mipsel (closes: #195899).
   * Call make with -j<number of CPU's>, if USE_NJOBS is set and non-empty
     in the environment (closes: #199782).
Files: 
 b0d70d4cefd2867895c45e8107ddc9de 1442 devel extra gcc-snapshot_20030706-1.dsc
 73cc528f0d37d0d824f4064a7367719e 21901194 devel extra gcc-snapshot_20030706.orig.tar.gz
 a83c0d0c71d4d7b0b24f37da2a40d196 64730 devel extra gcc-snapshot_20030706-1.diff.gz
 b6c1488be82e793ce14f254323600680 38336644 devel extra gcc-snapshot_20030706-1_i386.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/CBZdStlRaw+TLJwRAlqGAKCi2UvfNZh9S1bOKkN+rXzq/OMydgCgxV9f
EDlJ32/UsrweCGQavVPnUxo=
=inbK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: