Re: Looking for speed increases in "make index" and pkg_version for ports

On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 03:30:48PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:

That said, I'll ask this out in the open: am I the only one who sees the
benefit of GNU make in regards to this? There's a lot of built-in
functions in GNU make which could help in regards to ports. I have no
qualms with PMake per se, but if another tool gives us what we need,
then maybe we should consider the pros and cons of adapting that.
There's also CMake, which is incredibly fast.

Yes, you are. What gmake benefits?

Gmake does not provide the flexibility and power that pmake provides. Off
the top of my head: gmake does not have ".for" loops, variable expansion
modifiers, or even the "!=" shell command variable assigment. I use these
in almost every Makefile I write, and the ports uses these things quite a
bit. Also, gmake syntax is horrendous compared to pmake. People are
already complaining about how ugly the ports makefiles are-- they'd be
worse under gmake. Might as well rewrite the whole infrastructure in
/bin/sh ...

Also, there's the licensing issues. Remember-- any significant changes to
this infrastructure has to work with the core utilities.. this leaves out
gmake, python, ruby, etc. I doubt anyone will find anything as powerful
as pmake without sacrificing the much-used flexibility it provides.

-- Rick C. Petty
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"

Relevant Pages