[Libreoffice] [PATCH] Renaming extension options consistently

[Sebastian Spaeth]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 05:29:34 +0100, Jan Holesovsky wrote:
> > 1) if the user specifies max-cpus, do we want max-jobs to default to
> > max-cpus? Because that does make sense afaict.
> 
> The buildsystem is a bit strange in this regard ;-)  There are 2 levels
> of what is done in parallel - one on the level of directories, and one
> on what is done in the directory itself.  Ie. if you did what you
> propose, you'd get max-cpus * max-jobs in the 'ideal' situation.


We might explain that a bit better in the configure help text. I always
forget which is the exquivalent to "make -j n". Perhaps in the brave gnu
(make) world, we can simplify that to one switch?
 
> > 2) why is the system so keen on ice-cream? Is it because it's a java
> > technology? I note it's incompatible with distcc (which is what I've
> > got, and which isn't much use without a pc farm).
> > 
> > I've noticed other people moaning about ice-cream so should we remove
> > all the "why haven't you got it?" stuff, or just disable it if distcc
> > is installed?

+1 for quiet down the icecream advertisment a bit, we should rather put
instructions for that in our wiki. If someone configured to use distcc,
we should not output icecream related stuff at all. So who comes up with
a patch :-)?

Sebastian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/attachments/20101110/0e63709a/attachment.pgp>