> I've personally never felt the need to use Busybox make, for two > reasons : > - make is a development tool and has its place on development machines > more than embedded boxes ; > - It happens that GNU make (as well as GNU tar, surprisingly) has been > cleanly written and cleanly packaged, compiles easily with the uClibc > as well as the glibc, and produces a decently sized binary instead of > the usual GNU behemoths. (I suspect a direct intervention of the Lord > into the FSF developer pool.) So whenever I need to build a make, > GNU make is actually quite usable.
And I forgot the third, and most important, reason: - Contrary to what I've believed for ages, there's apparently no such thing as a "make" applet in Busybox. (Good thing it's not needed, then.) Which explains very well why you were confused, Harald: I was even more confused than you were. XD -- Laurent _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
