3 ms·

>because then you break other builds. [citation needed] Gnu make is a superset of posix compatible make standard.(with very few exceptions) It shouldn't break.

>because then you break other builds. [citation needed] Gnu make is a superset of posix compatible make standard.(with very few exceptions) It shouldn't break. If it breaks, I think it's a bug, and the makefile should be altered into posix-compliant compatibility with gnu make.

johnr2 7y ago
>>because then you break other builds. >[citation needed] From OpenBSD make(1) manpage: "The handling of ‘.depend’ is a BSD extension."
- nullifidian 7y ago
  Well, using "BSD extension" in 2019 is a luxury.
  - johnr2 7y ago
    > Well, using "BSD extension" in 2019 is a luxury. Considering it's the default on the OS I'm using to post this (OpenBSD) I'd regard it as fairly standard.
codetrotter 7y ago
The suggestion by the parent of my comment was to replace the system Make with GNU Make because others are using GNU Make specific features. On top of that you want to rewrite all of the Makefiles for other implementations of Make, that exist on systems where the implementation of Make that is included with the system is not GNU Make, so that the system still works after you've switched out the implementation of Make that came with the system with GNU Make. ... Why? Why should everyone else do a bunch of extra work just so that the projects using GNU Make can keep using GNU Make specific features, when literally all those people using those GNU Make features had to do was to rename their Makefile to GNUmakefile and it would keep working for them when they invoke GNU Make just the same way they did before and would not cause confusion for others?
- nullifidian 7y ago
  If you are talking about a bunch of BSD userland, probably the only place that uses BSD extensions and other gnu incompatible non-posix stuff, I think it's pretty easy to hardwire it to only build with BSD make variants. Who even builds it manually, and how often? The OPs comment was about software in general, and for software in general gnu make is more optimal as a default in 2019, that is unless you have to be standards-compliant.

johnr2 7y ago

>>because then you break other builds. >[citation needed] From OpenBSD make(1) manpage: "The handling of ‘.depend’ is a BSD extension."

nullifidian 7y ago
Well, using "BSD extension" in 2019 is a luxury.
- johnr2 7y ago
  > Well, using "BSD extension" in 2019 is a luxury. Considering it's the default on the OS I'm using to post this (OpenBSD) I'd regard it as fairly standard.

codetrotter 7y ago

The suggestion by the parent of my comment was to replace the system Make with GNU Make because others are using GNU Make specific features. On top of that you want to rewrite all of the Makefiles for other implementations of Make, that exist on systems where the implementation of Make that is included with the system is not GNU Make, so that the system still works after you've switched out the implementation of Make that came with the system with GNU Make. ... Why? Why should everyone else do a bunch of extra work just so that the projects using GNU Make can keep using GNU Make specific features, when literally all those people using those GNU Make features had to do was to rename their Makefile to GNUmakefile and it would keep working for them when they invoke GNU Make just the same way they did before and would not cause confusion for others?

nullifidian 7y ago
If you are talking about a bunch of BSD userland, probably the only place that uses BSD extensions and other gnu incompatible non-posix stuff, I think it's pretty easy to hardwire it to only build with BSD make variants. Who even builds it manually, and how often? The OPs comment was about software in general, and for software in general gnu make is more optimal as a default in 2019, that is unless you have to be standards-compliant.