From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29916 invoked by alias); 28 Dec 2002 19:07:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 29904 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 19:07:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 19:07:44 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18SOBU-0004QZ-00; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 15:07:52 -0600 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18SMKJ-0005vi-00; Sat, 28 Dec 2002 14:08:51 -0500 Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:26:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: (toplevel) Fix dramatic breakage for ordinary crosses (related to program_transform_name) Message-ID: <20021228190851.GA22612@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com References: <20021228093127.GA455@doctormoo> <20021228163419.GA10686@nevyn.them.org> <20021228175919.GA17177@nevyn.them.org> <3E0DF317.7080206@kegel.com> <200212281900.gBSJ0wG07639@envy.delorie.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200212281900.gBSJ0wG07639@envy.delorie.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00734.txt.bz2 On Sat, Dec 28, 2002 at 02:00:58PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > I dunno, sounds fine to me if it lets the subsequent real build > > go in parallel. > > If you fill the job slots with busy-wait configures, there aren't any > slots left to put real builds in. > > Of course, this is the point where we could conditionally take > advantage of gmake's "don't run these in parallel" syntax. Which it doesn't have. I was mistaken about the purpose of the construct I quoted. Not that we couldn't add such a syntax to GNU make; it might be generally useful. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer