From owner-cvs-gnu  Sun Jan  1 03:39:53 1995
Return-Path: cvs-gnu-owner
Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id DAA06973 for cvs-gnu-outgoing; Sun, 1 Jan 1995 03:39:53 -0800
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with ESMTP id DAA06967; Sun, 1 Jan 1995 03:39:47 -0800
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.9/8.6.9) id DAA06394; Sun, 1 Jan 1995 03:39:36 -0800
Date: Sun, 1 Jan 1995 03:39:36 -0800
Message-Id: <199501011139.DAA06394@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: CVS-commiters@freefall.cdrom.com, cvs-gnu@freefall.cdrom.com
In-reply-to: <9501010147.AA20820@login.dknet.dk> (phk@login.dknet.dk)
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/gnu/usr.bin/gdb/bfd sysdep.h
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: cvs-gnu-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * From: phk@login.dknet.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp)

 * We need to make a decision on all the GNU stuff.  The problem exists for all
 * of the gnu sources, if for nothing else then because of the bmake principle.
 * 
 * We need a traceable method to come from a gnu-dist to a bmake tree.

I guess I might be entirely missing the rim and the backboard here,
but is it possible to do it like the ports, i.e., just use gmake for
GNU stuff?  Is it worth all the trouble to convert everything to
bmake?

We probably want gmake in the base distrib anyway, there are too many
ports that need it.  I remember the non-existence of a bmake-able
gmake was one of the reasons that we don't have gmake.  Was there
another?

Satoshi (sorry if I opened another can of worms)