Keith M Wesolowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 05:48:48PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> The implicit assumption here is that Sun make will be available as
> open source sometime in the next year and possibly sooner still. If
> you don't trust that assumption, and are focused on /usr/ccs/bin/make
> for distributions, why not make an smake that has a true 100% Sun
> compatibility mode, and install that in /usr/ccs/bin, leaving smake
> and gmake as alternate options?
Smake is ~ 99% compliant with Sun make and GNU make differs alot more.
This is why I let point /usr/ccs/bin/make to smake.
> > While porting to OpenSolaris, I did so far only find one single project
> > that did need GNU make. Preferring GNU make means giving up the Solaris
> > identity in favor of Linux.
>
> No, it does not. GNU make and Linux are orthogonal. GNU make is
> platform-independent and is available for dozens of operating systems.
This is what people believe but it is unfortunately not true.
GNU make may compile on many systems but similar to many other programs
that have been developed on Linux during the past years, it seems that
it has been tested mainly on Linux.
I did start with smake in 1984 in order learn how a make program works.
I did port it to many platforms in the past but I did only implement
things that did need for my software. About 8 years ago, I was planning to
let smake die. Then I discovered that GNU make does not work correctly
on all platforms that use the backslash as path delimitor or that
use \r\n as end of line delimiter. I made a bug report to no avail.
Then I did decide to continue with my work on smake....
> Linux is a kernel, period. If you had said it changes the identity of
> the system to GNU, you might have some kind of argument, but we're not
> talking about replacing /usr/ccs/bin/make with GNU make, so I don't
This is why I use smake....
...
> I don't think that's the prevailing opinion at all. The obvious
> approach here is to expect distributions to be 100% binary-compatible
> with Solaris's interfaces. Exceptions would be for interfaces which
I am a bit confused now.....
While other people propose to create a GNU/Solaris am I the one who
tries to fight for Solaris compatibility. It seems that I am attacked for
my dedication. All I did while creating SchilliX was trying to be as compatible
as possible with the amount of time I can afford.
> are not provided at all by other distributions, and these exceptions
> need to be documented. You've discussed some difficulties with libm
> in particular, and we know that make and the packaging tools are sore
> spots. smake could be changes to be much more compatible with Sun
> make if you wanted to do so. Are there other situations beyond lack
> of redistribution rights that would justify binary incompatibility
> (other than missing functionality) between Solaris and another
> distributions?
I am currently only fighting with contraints. SchilliX is intended to be a legal
OpenSolaris distribution and it needs to be freely redistributable.
You named the sore points and this is where spend my time, directly or
indirectly caused, when working on SchilliX.
I could make smake more Sun make compatible but there is not much need for this
because smake is already compatible enough for most programs.
Sun could make Sun make more compatible to free make programs like GNU make
and smake.
- implement -include name
- implement include name1 name2 .....
- deprecate the current meaning for := for long term
usage and create a ?= alias/replacement for the future.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
