On Fri, 3 Jan 2014 08:03:33 -0800 Anatol Pomozov <anatol.pomozov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Paul Gideon Dann <pdgiddie@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Friday 03 Jan 2014 15:33:05 Martti Kühne wrote: > >> Because I have a strong opinion about this. Also to prevent people > >> from running into this who are not that experienced in making things > >> work. > > > > If someone makes more than a few packages, they will have encountered > > makepkg.conf, to at least set their e-mail address. When I started using > > Arch, I think I discovered makepkg.conf and added the -j to makeflags > > pretty much on day one of experimenting with PKGBUILDs. But I think it > > comes down to this: > > > > 1) If someone knows that the -j flag exists, it won't take them long to > > figure out how to add it to makeflags, and then the responsibility is with > > them to ensure they know it can (rarely!) break some builds. > > > > 2) If the -j flag is added by default, builds may break unpredictably, and > > users will not know why. They may not be aware of -j, and may not make > > the connection to makepkg.conf at all. > > > > Option 1 seems a safer default to me. However, I think this should be > > properly documented in makepkg.conf: there should be an actual suggestion > > to add -j, along with a warning that in rare cases it may cause breakage. > > Just a single-line comment, possibly with a link to the wiki, would be > > enough. > > But there always will be people who uses -jN (e.g. me). If we decide > to keep broken PKGBUILD in AUR forever then it means sooner or later > -jN people will be hit by this issues. So the choice is really: > > 1) Keep the broken packages forever and care only about -j1 people > (who is majority now). > 2) Make -jN by default. It will speedup compilation but it also make > the broken packages more visible. > > IMHO #2 is better. It is better to highlight all the broken PKGBUILD > and fix it thus make it working for everyone. Why is the default "-j" such a big deal? IMHO, the way things are currently is OK. You want to speedup compilation -- there is an option for that. FWIW, if you compile >1 package, you'll have to change lots of things in makepkg.conf besides makeflags (sign, packager info, CFLAGS) anyways. Cheers, -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key: 0x164B5A6D Fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
