Re: [dev] Yet another "sane alternatives" thread

From: stephen Turner <>
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2018 12:10:02 -0500

> On Dec 25, 2018, at 9:16 AM, Cág <> wrote:
> Jan Bessai wrote:
>> Not sure if it has any advantages for you, but you might try bmake
>> It is a port of the Netbsd make.
> bmake has its own conditionals like .if, .ifdef, .else, etc., i.e.
> it is itself incompatible with GNU make. I'm thinking of something
> you can compile the Linux kernel[0] with. Ever noticed how some
> developers include a Makefile and a GNUmakefile?*
> pkgsrc is an example. You can't use GNU make with it, and it ships with
> bmake -- unless it's NetBSD, whose bmake is just make(1).
> * - instead of writing portable Makefiles
> [0]:
> --
> caóc

I haven’t followed the project in a bit, I really should check in and see what they have finished but I know that project aimed to get most if not all of a build environment recreated in a portable form so if you haven’t seen it then I recommend it.

If I may ask, why do you disapprove of make? I would like to see it redone but curious your reasons.

Received on Tue Dec 25 2018 - 18:10:02 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Dec 25 2018 - 18:12:07 CET