>>> "Bruno" == Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bruno> So it must mean: "If the user has removed *.elc but elc-stamp is still Bruno> there, then remake elc-stamp." This scenario can still occur, and will Bruno> still lead to multiple parallel processes [except if only one .elc file Bruno> was missing], and will still fail the same way. Yes, I agree. If users mutilate their build tree they can only recover with a non-parallel make. But IMO a fix for this belongs to the rule that starts those multiple `$(MAKE) elc-stamp' processes, not to the elc-stamp rule. IOW locks are not needed in regular builds, they would only be needed to prevent multiple *recover* rules to start `$(MAKE) elc-stamp'. -- Alexandre Duret-Lutz
