Phil Carmody on Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:27:31 +0100
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Fwd: parallel make
- From: Phil Carmody <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 20:27:24 +0000 (GMT)
- Delivery-date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:27:31 +0100
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.co.uk; s=s1024; t=1327609644; bh=R6Ga3j86RURNDZ7nj6Eynnr52iBlrDM/BjsxeLXOUXA=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=MQvrGVNPvTiDOoFZTDKZS+TiE1LFAgjfTNAgPfyqn9pDL7zfm7w4uqL8xV55BdsSbQR3ZSLPAbXzxYaD9crhYQh9pgS5ayS7kFxSxzVY7Z4GA+vgEnYZmXqKI6apNQeT6qxQpWPII4KqwPlOfNBZP9dr0U8XE48LiFwPN4TWT6I=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.co.uk; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=5kxvGLmi83yDovlwVVYeM+SW1I+xaHlXoI+ZHUSpqOdaAzk4kjL7gxWmFoCiJmXdhyCJpGNFIL+ebhD1En9iqY1Ci1e3stpzxvT69rnIFnAsMegCAZwiKimP1Xi7DXurk4hZv9eYRevbLbVf8oV+P87YeYbLTPxDwcgz7QWsexY=;
- In-reply-to: <CAD0p0K7knxTJeRXgvZkLYzZQE3+hs0s-NP5JVru7w7gnOMf9OA@mail.gmail.com>
--- On Thu, 1/19/12, John Cremona <email@example.com> wrote:
> I normally build much faster using "make -j" instead of plain "make".
> Now I was just trying "./Configure --tune" for the first time, and I
> see that it is doing a full build (and I expect it will do this more
> than once given the estimated time for this given in the manual).
> If the Makefiles used $MAKE instead of make, then this could also be
> sped up via the user setting (e.g.) export MAKE='make -j' before
> starting. Is there any reason why this would not work?
If you have to perform recursive makes, then yes, that makes more sense. However, /Recursive Make Considered Harmful/. (There ought to be a followup to that called "gnu make without -r considered harmful". Strace a gmake on an empty directory, I dare you.