Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:17:18
-0700 (PDT)):
On Wed, 13 Jun 2007, Rick C. Petty wrote:
Now another question is whether the pkg_* tools can handle multiple
processes managing the ports at the same time. For the mostpart, this is
true. Without looking at the code, I would expect that the only
contentions would be when trying to update the +REQUIRED_BY files.
Everything else should be just fine; you're not supposed to be installing
the same port multiple times at the exact same time, but maybe a lock could
be held on the package directory (i.e. /var/db/pkg/$PKG_NAME). Again, I
don't believe this is strictly necessary.
Currently, no, and this is a condition that's contingent for a fellow
SoC'er's project. The mentor said that all that *should* occur is there
should be an flock, but that was it. So instead of making more work for
him and since I am modifying pkg_* already, I thought it would be best
to just make my modifications to simplify his end (he still has a ways
to go on the dependency tracking I think).
It goes a bit deeper than the +REQUIRED_BY files, in particular with
the +CONTENTS, etc files as the pkg_* tools are enumerating the
packages currently on the system, their dependencies, owning files,
etc. Perhaps a global .lock file of some kind in the package
directories would be the way to go though.
Stephen already pointed out the patches which speed up pkg_create and
bsd.port.mk. I want to highlight the bsd.port.mk change which takes
the package dependency info from the +CONTENTS file. So any changes by
the other student should take this into account...
Bye,
Alexander.
--
Some rise by sin and some by virtue fall.
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
