Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:41:57 +0100 From: Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> To: Eduardo Cerejo <ejcerejo@optonline.net> Cc: FreeBSD-questions@FreeBSD.org, Peter Boosten <peter@boosten.org> Subject: Re: Gcc and make not producing executable Message-ID: <20080319204157.GA71458@owl.midgard.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <20080319162309.5fce0b9c.ejcerejo@optonline.net> References: <20080318225936.9ef5af16.ejcerejo@optonline.net> <47E0B4FA.1070605@boosten.org> <20080319162309.5fce0b9c.ejcerejo@optonline.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 04:23:09PM -0400, Eduardo Cerejo wrote: > > gmake does the trick. > > Indeed it did. Can you tell me what the main differences is between make > and gmake in terms of "making"? I can see that gmake is gnu's version of > make, is FreeBSD's gmake the same as linux's make? gmake is the GNU project's version of 'make'. The 'make' command installed on Linux systems is usually GNU make. FreeBSD uses its own version of 'make' and installs GNU make under the name 'gmake' to avoid collision with the native make. Both GNU make and FreeBSD's make has lots of extensions and extra features over a "standard" make program. Unfortunately they have completely different syntax for these extensions. This means that while simple makefiles will work equally well on either, more complicated makefiles will typically work with either one or the other implementation of make, but rarely with more than one. -- <Insert your favourite quote here.> Erik Trulsson ertr1013@student.uu.se
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080319204157.GA71458>