> Given the whole GNU make vs BSD make incompatibility, I was curious about > why some porting schemes use the latter. Are there any advantages to it?
The GNU-Darwin project took as their starting point a collection of several thousand packages which already work on FreeBSD. In order to take advantage of this pre-existing collection, they created a build system which modifies Darwin to closely approximate FreeBSD. It works well, in the sense that many things compile and run. The Fink project, on the other hand, took as its starting point the desire to adapt existing packages to work as well as possible with Darwin, including unique features of Darwin such as the way Darwin handles shared libraries. I have seen references on the GNU-Darwin site to the fact that a number of upstream packages are starting to implement Darwin-only features like the .dylib system of shared libraries, and noting that GNU-Darwin is now able to take advantage of those features. In some cases, those upstream packages got their changes directly from Fink; in other cases, they are using updated versions of libtool which were created with the help of Fink developers. I'm sure that there are also many cases where the upstream maintainers independently adapted their programs to work efficiently with Fink. The beauty of open source is that all of these updates are now available to both the GNU-Darwin and Fink projects. -- Dave _______________________________________________________________ Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Fink-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
