On Sat, 2005-07-09 at 15:11 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: > On Saturday 09 July 2005 15:05, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > > Ditto - point being, is that if you want the agony of per-ebuild hacks, > > be my guest, but do not expect the rest to hold your hand. > It's not a matter of per-ebuild hack. > Let me explain for example: > > for a bit of time we had make -> gmake alias on g/fbsd profiles, but emake > still called plain "make" (bsdmake). > That was fine for most of the cases, gawk was the first one failing because > it > uess $(RM) which on gmake is an internal but it's not in other makes. The > "good" solution was to fix the configure.in (or .ac i don't remember) to make > sure that RM variable was set. That was discarded and we needed to let emake > call gmake. > > The problem of make/gmake is minimal, just a few corner cases, but I don't > really like have to use alias make='gmake' in profiles.
Could do a make wrapper similar to the emake one, that just stips /usr/$(get_libdir)/portage/bin from PATH, and then run $MAKE. Then bsd will only need to add MAKE=gmake to its profile, and change it to MAKE=make or whatever for the bsd only stuff ? (as I assume you already have to do that for emake ...) Anyhow, just a suggestion. -- Martin Schlemmer Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer Cape Town, South Africa
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
