Hi,
I looked into this. The relevant bits appear in output.c:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
/* Obtain the lock for writing output. */
static void *
acquire_semaphore (void)
{
static struct flock fl;
fl.l_type = F_WRLCK;
fl.l_whence = SEEK_SET;
fl.l_start = 0;
fl.l_len = 1;
if (fcntl (sync_handle, F_SETLKW, &fl) != -1)
return &fl;
perror ("fcntl()");
return NULL;
}
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
So this does look like make explicitly will wait for the lock to
be released (F_SETLKW instead of F_SETLK). The open question is whether
the current behaviour is undesireable, and what the ramifications might
be of not waiting for a lock.
manoj
--
"I believe that Ronald Reagan will someday make this country what it
once was... an arctic wilderness."-- Steve Martin
Manoj Srivastava <sriva...@acm.org>
4096R/C5779A1C E37E 5EC5 2A01 DA25 AD20 05B6 CF48 9438 C577 9A1C
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
