code review 5530063: cmd/go: fix freebsd build

cmd/go: fix freebsd build

[mikio, 2012-01-10 05:33:17]

Hello golang-dev@googlegroups.com (cc: golang-dev@googlegroups.com),

I'd like you to review this change to
https://go.googlecode.com/hg/

[mikio, 2012-01-10 05:38:10]

Sorry I have no spare time to take a look at NumCPU of runtime
on both freebsd/386, amd64.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 2:33 PM,  <mikioh.mikioh@gmail.com> wrote:
> Reviewers: golang-dev_googlegroups.com,
>
> Message:
> Hello golang-dev@googlegroups.com (cc: golang-dev@googlegroups.com),
>
> I'd like you to review this change to
> https://go.googlecode.com/hg/
>
>
> Description:
> cmd/go: fix freebsd build
>
> Please review this at http://codereview.appspot.com/5530063/
>
> Affected files:
>  M src/cmd/go/build.go
>
>
> Index: src/cmd/go/build.go
> ===================================================================
> --- a/src/cmd/go/build.go
> +++ b/src/cmd/go/build.go
> @@ -449,6 +449,9 @@
>        // drop the parallelism to 1, both to make the output
>        // deterministic and because there is no real work anyway.
>        par := buildP
> +       if par == 0 {
> +               par = 1
> +       }
>        if buildN {
>                par = 1
>        }
>
>

[adg, 2012-01-10 05:40:06]

LGTM

This is a nice safeguard against runtime.NumCPUs() returning zero (or
the user providing -p 0), but we need to fix NumCPUs, too.

[adg, 2012-01-10 05:41:49]

On 10 January 2012 16:38, Mikio Hara <mikioh.mikioh@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry I have no spare time to take a look at NumCPU of runtime
> on both freebsd/386, amd64.

I'll take a crack at it.

[mikio, 2012-01-10 05:46:31]

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Andrew Gerrand <adg@golang.org> wrote:

>> Sorry I have no spare time to take a look at NumCPU of runtime
>> on both freebsd/386, amd64.
>
> I'll take a crack at it.

Thaaaaaaaaaanx a lot.

[mikio, 2012-01-10 05:47:25]

*** Submitted as http://code.google.com/p/go/source/detail?r=1d7295fdf62e ***

cmd/go: fix freebsd build

R=golang-dev, adg
CC=golang-dev
http://codereview.appspot.com/5530063

[rsc, 2012-01-10 06:41:00]

Please hg undo this CL once you have fixed runtime.NumCPU.

It should be unnecessary to guard against functions in runtime
misbehaving.  Where does it stop?

[adg, 2012-01-10 07:52:28]

What about -p 0 ?
On Jan 10, 2012 5:41 PM, "Russ Cox" <rsc@golang.org> wrote:

> Please hg undo this CL once you have fixed runtime.NumCPU.
>
> It should be unnecessary to guard against functions in runtime
> misbehaving.  Where does it stop?
>

[rsc, 2012-01-10 07:57:44]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 23:52, Andrew Gerrand <adg@golang.org> wrote:
> What about -p 0 ?

If you run -p 0 and you get a deadlock,
seems like it's doing what you asked.

Russ