On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 4:51 AM Klemens Nanni <k...@openbsd.org> wrote: > > 07.11.2024 14:27, Stuart Henderson пишет: > > On 2024/11/07 08:56, Stuart Henderson wrote: > >> I think it would be better not to kill this port on base-gcc arches. > >> Perhaps make building pzstd conditional? > >> > >> I'd also worry about an archiver that pulls in ports-gcc causing a > >> dependency loop on ports-gcc archs (seems ok now, but perhaps sometime > >> in the future). > > > > Also, multithreaded support was added to zstd itself (-T(number of > > cores), or -T0 to autodetect), pzstd has not been recommended for some > > time now: > > > > https://github.com/facebook/zstd/issues/407#issuecomment-299952807 > > +1 > > I don't see a reason to include pzstd and mess with the port.
thanks everyone for the eyeballs, i guess i simply didn't rtfm and the port does not need this. i think i was simply used to pzstd existing elsewhere, and was a bit misled by the fact that zstd -h makes no mention of -T. the manual makes it clear.
