bug-gettext
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: make --shuffle


From: Santiago Vila
Subject: Re: make --shuffle
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 13:56:54 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird

El 2/12/24 a las 13:25, Bruno Haible escribió:
The problem is that it's a complex package and I still don't know if this
is an upstream bug, or maybe the maintainer is using the code in a way
which was not expected to be supported, so I'm still undecided about
what to do...

What is wrong with saying "We routinely build all packages with -j4.
Your package sometimes fails to build in this setting. Please add missing
dependencies and don't rename built files after-the-fact, or add a
.NOTPARALLEL:  line, to let our builds succeed anyway." ?

The thing is that the Debian gcc-14-cross package is quite
the opposite of that. Maybe I didn't explain well:

I'm building with single-CPU virtual machines for QA purposes,
the package fails to build 100% of the time in such configuration,
without doing anything special like using the --shuffle option,
and yet the maintainer wants me to accept that it's not a supported
configuration because the official Debian buildds (the machines
which create the .debs we distribute from the Debian source
packages) always have more than one CPU.

And that's the paradox: While GNU considers building with one CPU
the "safe" option in case parallel support is incomplete, some Debian
maintainers want to force people working on QA issues like me
to consider multi-core as the only supported thing. (Needless to say,
I have no words to express how wrong that seems to me).

That's why the GNU policy regarding parallel builds gives me
some hope that the GNU project may still be interested in fixing
the GCC bug.

Thanks.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]