Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 5 May 2014 16:33:02 -0600
From:      Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
To:        Julian Elischer <julian@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        sjg@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Hartmut.Brandt@dlr.de, jmmv@freebsd.org, bapt@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Can fmake be deleted?
Message-ID:  <1CEFC5F1-084B-4785-983F-C42EB858E2F9@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <53678B51.4050406@freebsd.org>
References:  <CAFY7cWAdWETwZH1Cb_BQY%2B7Eh-kVd9n0V8a%2Bu1a6J069aWCONA@mail.gmail.com> <20140422202506.GA63561@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <CAFY7cWCSm5hMhsOovSfCNdcphGRYNdbaufTd31SHbwwTPF3DXA@mail.gmail.com> <20140422214610.GC63561@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <CAFY7cWCurUNEnewqwVbUY0yxr%2BiDsB1RFGB7KgRwjhHKggr%2Btw@mail.gmail.com> <611243783F62AF48AFB07BC25FA4B1061CACCBA2@DLREXMBX01.intra.dlr.de> <53678B51.4050406@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On May 5, 2014, at 7:00 AM, Julian Elischer <julian@FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> On 5/5/14, 7:41 PM, Hartmut.Brandt@dlr.de wrote:
>> Hi,
>>=20
>> I've seen that you've copied all the make tests over to usr.bin/make =
with a comment that they are fmake-only. According to your question they =
are to be removed.
>>=20
>> Isn't bmake based on some version of fmake? In fact several of these =
tests check for bugs that I've fixed in our fmake some years ago. Are =
they now reintroduced via the bmake import? Wouldn't it make sense to =
retain the tests that apply to bmake?
>=20
> so this brings up the question on my mind which is;
>=20
> So what's up with bmake?
> How does it relate to the old FreeBSD make?
> Why did we need a  new make?  what does it get us?

bmake is NetBSD=92s make.

fmake and bmake have a common ancestor and some cross pollination over =
the years, but they have become incompatible.

bmake is better maintained than fmake. The whole meta-build system is =
based on it, which would be a quantum leap beyond what fmake can do. In =
the mean time, we get better compatibility with NetBSD, a better =
maintained make and slightly better syntax for some things (and fewer =
bugs) at the cost of some growing pains where the two were incompatible, =
or we had bugs in fmake that we accidentally depended on.

fmake remains in the tree as a transition measure. The next step is to =
remove the (already broken) support for building world with fmake. Once =
somebody has an actual, working fmake port, and some time has passed, we =
 can reorbit it from the tree. This has always been the plan, as far as =
I know, and there=92s no reason to significantly speed it up based on =
this thread.

Warner=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1CEFC5F1-084B-4785-983F-C42EB858E2F9>