I wasn't digressing. I was explaining the point. the concept I am trying to
present as a solution to the problem of making parallel stdin for --jobs in gnu
make (which currenty doesn't work and is I guess single-threaded) is to make a
separate terminal or command shell for each job, such as via a generated batch
file or shell script.
this is as simple as I can make it.
at the end of the shell script, you can put in whatever you like, such as
synchronization stuff saying "I am done" by creating a semaphore file, a flag
file.
the problem would then be porting BASH to windows and other platforms in order
to handle --jobs.
I have learned that on a machine with 12 threads and 64GB of memory, you can
have 50+ jobs running.
>________________________________
> From: Paul Smith <psm...@gnu.org>
>To: Jim Michaels <jmich...@yahoo.com>
>Cc: bug-make@gnu.org
>Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 10:56 AM
>Subject: Re: feature request: parallel builds feature
>
>
>On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 00:42 -0700, Jim Michaels wrote:
>> it currently has a problem with stdin, because at this point there is
>> only one of those, only 1 of them gets it, and the others starve. so
>> if your build needs stdin or creates files from the commandline using
>> heredocs, you can't use it (check first!). you will get an error. gnu
>> has not yet figured out a solution yet (I have, multiple shells IF you
>> can control them... probably can't without some work creating batch
>> files for the jobs). so there is a solution. even with a batch file,
>> make would need some sort of way of reporting back error conditions. I
>> think there are ways of managing that with files via presence-detect,
>> sort of like semaphores. they should get cleared when the job ends, or
>> when a switch is given to clear the state for that session if the
>> session was broken with ctrl-c. well, I suppose a ctrl-c handler
>> should still kill those terminals or cmd shells and clear up those
>> files.
>> what do you think?
>> if a terminal is opened, it should be created without a window. some
>> OS's have that option. some don't, like freeDOS, which would not have
>> the ability to do terminals, parallel shell windows, or even the
>> --jobs feature (but that's implementation-dependent).
>
>Please keep the mailing list CC'd. Thanks.
>
>I'm afraid I still don't understand what you're asking for here. You'll
>need to back up and provide a description of your needs in a clear,
>orderly way without digressions.
>
>Yes, it's true that GNU make only provides its stdin to one job at a
>time and which job gets it is essentially random. In order to address
>this we'd need to see a specific use-case or requirement, but my
>suspicion is that all such possible use-cases are better solved by a
>change of process at a level above what make can provide.
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
