On Tuesday 14 January 2014 19:20:56 Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jan 2014, Alexander Holler wrote: > > I just was curious if there was some progress on that topic besides what > > Ralf Wildenhues seemed to have tried out. > > The most challenging aspect is because configure scripts have a huge > amount of dependencies (e.g. shell variable definitions) which only > work due to the sequential nature of the script. In order to > parallize configure, one would need to somehow assure that results are > available in the correct order. Such logic is normal in make files > but not in shell scripts. > > Part of configure scripts is written by the developers of a package > and not from Autoconf and Autoconf has no way to predict the behavior > of code which is outside of its control. there's semi-precedence though with introducing new macros when there's no confidence in safely converting existing one. consider: AC_CHECK_FUNC beget AC_CHECK_FUNCs beget AC_CHECK_FUNCS_ONCE same for HEADERS and DECLS. maybe time to beget a AC_CHECK_FUNCS_ONCE_PARALLEL ? :) or maybe enshrine the ONCE behavior and call it AC_CHECK_FUNCS_PARA. that'd cover a decent amount of ground (albeit, not as much as would truly be possible from an interlocked pipeline) without too much pain. -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
