Re: [Chicken-hackers] Re: separate build directory support for Chicken

[Peter Bex]

On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 10:39:03AM -0800, Elf wrote:
> 
> http://keramida.wordpress.com/2007/12/04/bmake-call-for-developers/
> 
> this is about the fifth differing bmake ive run across.

As you can read in the comments, this is just another sad case of
someone who's reinventing the wheel.  And picking a bad name for his
project to boot.

Porting the FreeBSD make is a stupid idea because FreeBSD does not have
portability high in their priority list.  This would mean they'd have to
do a lot of work to keep their project synched.  This project is doomed
to fail, so why should we care about it?

> none of which seems
> to be particularly well supported outside of the particular bsd in which
> it was written.

Check your favorite Linux package tool for a bsd make.  9 times out of 10
it's NetBSD's make, the one that comes with pkgsrc and that is
well-maintained and guaranteed to be portable.

> most of which seem to be pre-alpha.  very few of which 
> seem to be 100% compat with each other.  explain to me why this would be a 
> win?

We don't have to support all of these silly pre-alpha ports, we can just use
one and stick with it.  This is like arguing there are so many versions of
'make' and saying that's why we shouldn't use it.

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music."
                                                        -- Donald Knuth

pgpahGRTwJwc6.pgp
Description: PGP signature