Hi Wol, Wols Lists píše v Pá 05. 11. 2010 v 18:04 +0000: > On 05/11/10 17:13, Niko Rönkkö wrote: > > dnl > =================================================================== > > dnl Optional Packages (--with/without-) > > dnl > =================================================================== > > @@ -1214,103 +1369,97 @@ AC_ARG_WITH(max-jobs, > > Defaults to 1, unless you configure --enable-icecream - > then to 10.]), > > ,) > > > Two points here ... > > 1) if the user specifies max-cpus, do we want max-jobs to default to > max-cpus? Because that does make sense afaict.
The buildsystem is a bit strange in this regard ;-) There are 2 levels of what is done in parallel - one on the level of directories, and one on what is done in the directory itself. Ie. if you did what you propose, you'd get max-cpus * max-jobs in the 'ideal' situation. > 2) why is the system so keen on ice-cream? Is it because it's a java > technology? I note it's incompatible with distcc (which is what I've > got, and which isn't much use without a pc farm). > > I've noticed other people moaning about ice-cream so should we remove > all the "why haven't you got it?" stuff, or just disable it if distcc > is > installed? Icecream has the advantage that it has a scheduler, and chooses the fastest and least loaded machines in the farm. Of course, using distcc is also an option, and you are right that it would be good to disable the warnings if one already uses distcc. Unfortunately I am using icecream, so I am not a good candidate to do a patch for that ;-) Regards, Kendy _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
