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

Bug#209008: parallel building: DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS or DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS_PARALLEL



[Russ Allbery]
> @@ -6466,6 +6466,20 @@
>  		not be stripped from the binary during installation,
>  		so that debugging information may be included in the package.
>  	    </item>
> +	    <tag>parallel=n</tag>
> +	    <item>
> +		This string means that the package should be built using
> +		up to <tt>n</tt> parallel processes if the package build

As a matter of typography, I think the n should be <em> rather than <tt>.

> +		    Packages built with <tt>make</tt> can often implement
> +		    this by passing the <tt>-jn</tt> option to

Here too.  <tt>-j</tt><em>n</em>

> @@ -6490,6 +6504,10 @@
>  ifeq (,$(findstring nostrip,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
>  INSTALL_PROGRAM += -s
>  endif
> +ifneq (,$(findstring parallel=,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
> +NUMJOBS = $(patsubst parallel=%,%,$(filter parallel=%,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
> +MAKEFLAGS += -j$(NUMJOBS)
> +endif
>  	  </example>
>  	</p>

As I mentioned in another message, this will only work for a
whitespace-separated DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS value.  Policy unfortunately
doesn't specify the delimiter to be used in DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS, and I
think a lot of people (including myself) use a comma.  I proposed a
makefile snippet earlier that works around this and also provides a
nicer interface for the rest of the makefile.

Aside from those issues, here's a +1 vote from a non-developer on your diff.
-- 
Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: