On 02.05.2018 17:44, Robert Haas wrote:
> But having parallel make work better and more efficiently
> and with fewer hard-to-diagnose failure modes would definitely be
> nice.
that's especially a thing I haven't seen in "our" environment,
this was an area where autotools and cmake didn't really differ,
at least not for the Unix/Makefile side of things.
The only thing about parallelism I remember that it sometimes
doesn't work well with the progress percentage output of cmake
generated makefiles ... but that's purely cosmetic.
--
hartmut
