5 ms·

> macs don't have a recent bash Macs don't have GNU make 4, only 3.81, so it's outright not portable with that > thingie.

by lloeki 7y ago

alwillis 7y ago
Use Homebrew [1] to install the most current versions of bash and make. By default, it’s installed as gmake to not conflict with the existing make 3.81. [1]: https://brew.sh/ https://brew.sh/
- lloeki 7y ago
  Sometimes you're not in a position to know, suggest, nor decide if people are using such a package manager (may it be Homebrew, MacPorts, ArchMac...) They may type make out of habit. This introduces a significant dependency, which makes people less inclined to use your stuff. It all depends on the use case, but in some situations a cop out such as "just use Homebrew" is actively user hostile due to the amount of human friction it generates. As it turns out, I've written bucketloads of portable (GNU and non-GNU) makefiles and never needed a post v3 feature.
blattimwind 7y ago
> Macs don't have GNU make 4, only 3.81 Released April 1st, 2004.
- Tomte 7y ago
  Without looking it up: make probably had a license change (to GPLv3?) between those versions. That's usually the reason why Macs have outdated tools from Linux land.
  - blattimwind 7y ago
    Yes, 3.81 is GPLv2 or later, 3.82 is GPLv3.
    - panpanna 7y ago
      But why would GPLv3 be a problem for Apple in this case? Is this a more political move?
      - detaro 7y ago
        They appear to have a general rule of never using GPLv3, even if it would be fine for some tools. (It'd be problematic for things that could also be a part of iOS, or components they'd lock down with unavoidable SIP-like mechanisms, option they likely want to keep open for parts of the system)
        panpanna 7y ago
        This is a horrible decision and is bad for developers everywhere.
        saagarjha 7y ago
        Apple is actively ripping out software licensed under earlier versions of GPL as well, as they're now horribly out of date.
        anoncake 7y ago
        It's a terrible decision for developers everywhere but what about Apple's profits?
      - goodcanadian 7y ago
        GPLv3 requires open hardware in the sense that you can replace the operating system with anything you want. That is probably not a position that Apple wants to formally accept. Our company has a similar problem in that there are safety implications if we were to allow the user to replace our system with their own, therefore GPLv3 is off limits to us.
        panpanna 7y ago
        I don't think your interpretation of GPLv3 is correct. This is a standalone utility, is has nothing to do with the OS.

> macs don't have a recent bash Macs don't have GNU make 4, only 3.81, so it's outright not portable with that > thingie.

by lloeki 7y ago

> macs don't have a recent bash Macs don't have GNU make 4, only 3.81, so it's outright not portable with that > thingie.

alwillis 7y ago

Use Homebrew [1] to install the most current versions of bash and make. By default, it’s installed as gmake to not conflict with the existing make 3.81. [1]: https://brew.sh/ https://brew.sh/

lloeki 7y ago
Sometimes you're not in a position to know, suggest, nor decide if people are using such a package manager (may it be Homebrew, MacPorts, ArchMac...) They may type make out of habit. This introduces a significant dependency, which makes people less inclined to use your stuff. It all depends on the use case, but in some situations a cop out such as "just use Homebrew" is actively user hostile due to the amount of human friction it generates. As it turns out, I've written bucketloads of portable (GNU and non-GNU) makefiles and never needed a post v3 feature.

blattimwind 7y ago

> Macs don't have GNU make 4, only 3.81 Released April 1st, 2004.

Tomte 7y ago
Without looking it up: make probably had a license change (to GPLv3?) between those versions. That's usually the reason why Macs have outdated tools from Linux land.
- blattimwind 7y ago
  Yes, 3.81 is GPLv2 or later, 3.82 is GPLv3.
  - panpanna 7y ago
    But why would GPLv3 be a problem for Apple in this case? Is this a more political move?
    - detaro 7y ago
      They appear to have a general rule of never using GPLv3, even if it would be fine for some tools. (It'd be problematic for things that could also be a part of iOS, or components they'd lock down with unavoidable SIP-like mechanisms, option they likely want to keep open for parts of the system)
      - panpanna 7y ago
        This is a horrible decision and is bad for developers everywhere.
        saagarjha 7y ago
        Apple is actively ripping out software licensed under earlier versions of GPL as well, as they're now horribly out of date.
        anoncake 7y ago
        It's a terrible decision for developers everywhere but what about Apple's profits?
    - goodcanadian 7y ago
      GPLv3 requires open hardware in the sense that you can replace the operating system with anything you want. That is probably not a position that Apple wants to formally accept. Our company has a similar problem in that there are safety implications if we were to allow the user to replace our system with their own, therefore GPLv3 is off limits to us.
      - panpanna 7y ago
        I don't think your interpretation of GPLv3 is correct. This is a standalone utility, is has nothing to do with the OS.