From a user perspective it has been a treat. I had issues with the GNU
M4 compiling on a embedded musl and PCC system but this M4 compiled
quick and clean. The only potential downside i can think of is it may
not be well maintained. last i checked the website there were no new
releases from when we tweaked the make file. There is another project
called elftoolchain which replaces binutils but i haven't tested it
yet.
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Mattias Andrée <maandree_AT_kth.se> wrote:
> It looks pretty good, maybe we should recommend it as an
> external component.
>
> On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 09:43:42 -0500
> stephen Turner <stephen.n.turner_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think this was blocked by the mailing list, sorry if
>> its a duplicate. I wanted to mention that there is a m4
>> converted from a bsd rewrite of m4 into a more Linux
>> compatible version, he advised it had all the popularly
>> used features but may be missing a few of the lesser
>> used. I for one have used it for a while with pcc and
>> haven't seen issues related to m4. Perhaps this would be
>> a helpful starting point for you.
>>
>> http://haddonthethird.net/m4/
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 9:31 AM, stephen Turner
>> <stephen.n.turner_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>> > As far as m4 is concerned I happened to meet a guy who
>> > converted a bsd rewrite of m4 into a more Linux
>> > compatible version, he advised it had all the popularly
>> > used features but may be missing a few of the lesser
>> > used. I for one have used it for a while with pcc and
>> > haven't seen issues related to m4. Perhaps this would
>> > be a helpful starting point for you.
>> >
>> > http://haddonthethird.net/m4/
>> >
>> >
>> > On Friday, February 3, 2017,
>> > <sylvain.bertrand_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 06:45:49PM +0100, Mattias
>> >> Andrée wrote:
>> >> > I'm work on implementing make(1)
>> >>
>> >> In theory, linux kbuild should be a good reference for
>> >> the minimum set of makefile extensions to code. Well,
>> >> in theory, the guys paid full-time at the
>> >> linux fondation to work on kbuild, should have
>> >> constraint themselves to use the
>> >> bare minimum of makefile extensions, and be honest
>> >> about it (they aren't, be
>> >> carefull). suckless: better have a bit more roughness
>> >> in the makefile than depends on super duper makefile
>> >> extensions... which would make coding an alternative
>> >> to make something crazy or insane. It's like C, the
>> >> bare minimum of extensions would be those required to
>> >> compile a kernel like linux (a good part of C89 syntax
>> >> is already tooooo much, hence
>> >> even more with C99), but the gcc inline assembly is
>> >> critical. The "right" answer would be to abstract away
>> >> what's really needed (minimal) from a C toolchain for
>> >> a reasonable linux build (even clang/llvm people
>> >> failed).
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Sylvain
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
Received on Thu Feb 09 2017 - 00:37:39 CET