From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id CIngKfSVmmC2tAAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 16:34:28 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id iBmYJfSVmmBlNQAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 14:34:28 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 647E7C1B0 for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 16:34:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:41372 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lgTSt-00021A-H0 for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 11 May 2021 10:34:27 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46084) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lgTKk-0005NJ-Lg for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 May 2021 10:26:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:53726) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lgTKk-0002JC-Bs for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 May 2021 10:26:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lgTKk-0006aR-8Y for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 May 2021 10:26:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#38649] [PATCH] Parallelize `guix package` Resent-From: Leo Prikler Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 14:26:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 38649 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: control@debbugs.gnu.org, julien lepiller , 38649@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 38649-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B38649.162074312325237 (code B ref 38649); Tue, 11 May 2021 14:26:02 +0000 Received: (at 38649) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 May 2021 14:25:23 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37031 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lgTK7-0006Yx-8T for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 11 May 2021 10:25:23 -0400 Received: from mailrelay.tugraz.at ([129.27.2.202]:26330) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lgTK4-0006Yk-Ua; Tue, 11 May 2021 10:25:21 -0400 Received: from [10.0.0.4] (91-114-247-246.adsl.highway.telekom.at [91.114.247.246]) by mailrelay.tugraz.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4FfgDs2lXmz1LLyL; Tue, 11 May 2021 16:25:17 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mailrelay.tugraz.at 4FfgDs2lXmz1LLyL DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tugraz.at; s=mailrelay; t=1620743117; bh=brt2wMMaFuDiitoIXNsc1i3i4uZvYO3V6NavXGAONKA=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=SHo4W/9DMsJ19L89NAgny0Jz/urJIWcHIyv7GRYI0HM1AEMRIhWTGUHSCtGij8e0b QYR74GrLXJsjJU7bL/x7CiXjGZhcurvp/dcwqtMEMoA5j/hCaDDsD86/w+hGdzajVI pzDN6nt6DONGOg99IBjxJ4xAmd4rj7D32vNBsy14= Message-ID: From: Leo Prikler Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 16:24:56 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87lfr9pume.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87tv5zrpjp.fsf@gnu.org> <3d0ca2a8b59dd99e15b55033bc89b2e21aa49814.camel@student.tugraz.at> <87lfr9pume.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TUG-Backscatter-control: bt4lQm5Tva3SBgCuw0EnZw X-Spam-Scanner: SpamAssassin 3.003001 X-Spam-Score-relay: -1.9 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.74 on 129.27.10.117 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1620743668; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=brt2wMMaFuDiitoIXNsc1i3i4uZvYO3V6NavXGAONKA=; b=kFeJTaQDObAFfNXV8n0pogTVfeHdWFEKSDuOwUAj+mfeXZ5wIlZRcyO4qz8UujVOGhnaC/ 8Q/M1AzhU9A0ltWdzGv8J+SYkbTYHc1hjjvbJ3tPWlhRw0UEB6Tggk/GdFMqeyJ/uqGAkc vu+LnFEKTjmQj3+li5a+W2PaLS9KuSxHGt6Zo7DK7wfq9srLxNfdS6NjAo9PnzNu53ms68 By8tKH5Cjs6Dw9DS8BiAUtJKxDMigy3vk7EK/iw69cuGKBabTuXV9LOwceLo9hrq5Oz5ti jK8nNAd7k9dgFxVRbWsFao+vlGGmF0IxX/6L58oFF+5b6np3JiRk5GbbxiDadQ== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1620743668; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=MoibKsMl9e+mcjxZZxLBeHtfDGUc52O5n+8OLBUP0VJDOYoJQGlH+7eeAXPvxqCehxEMC4 KYsd/9U7KuvQ+nvYSBnvAkUvjyiGDpkOoEXEFdImKzUPOnfSrCX7htYGA2pGUJcPuag/V+ UiNWgeCkw7rde99U0zwPjdaDDMBqYN0e8nOxogggKyPyju5kzHAASt2jO3B8UOuPW8li1+ Vg4Dh1lC0OvUe8ZTfKVStJ0SOdvwWh9Gx5miZbnt/38zHHs65hjROMagfralEkSTHVOeGq TlYOFOhxV/MC9UDUGJlICTBMfrgnBsdIMXkiGax2RScGal3eHQopmAoboJeB0Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=tugraz.at header.s=mailrelay header.b="SHo4W/9D"; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -1.35 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=tugraz.at header.s=mailrelay header.b="SHo4W/9D"; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=student.tugraz.at (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 647E7C1B0 X-Spam-Score: -1.35 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: DzuG2OO9DOnA close 38649 thanks Am Mittwoch, den 18.12.2019, 15:37 +0100 schrieb Ludovic Courtès: > I cannot think of a useful behavior if wait-for-lock were > implemented. > Really, as a user, you’d be unable to know what the end result is. I > don’t see that as very useful. :-) It took a while, but I feel you've convinced me.