Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> But then the answer could be, if you want to use parallel make, use a
> version that's not broken.
That's not a terribly practical answer for people who use the "make"
supplied by their OS vendor, which is approximately 99.9% of people.
It's even less practical for packagers, who don't have a choice about
what tool set to use.
Even if I wanted to use a locally-patched make, I'm not sure I'd trust a
patch that doesn't seem to have been signed off on by any actual gmake
developer or maintainer. That sort of cure is frequently worse than the
disease.
regards, tom lane