Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 23:59:42 +0100 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> To: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Removin the old make Message-ID: <20150210225941.GU29891@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <20150210224937.GE58387@eureka.lemis.com> References: <20150210223854.GT29891@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20150210224937.GE58387@eureka.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--O9T4zNOkGnr0n+A/ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 09:49:37AM +1100, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > On Tuesday, 10 February 2015 at 23:38:54 +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I would like to start using bmake only syntax on our infrastructure for= that I > > want to make sure noone is using the old make, so I plan to remove the = old make > > from base, I plan to do it by Feb 16th. >=20 > How does this affect non-system Makefiles that depend on pmake? Is > bmake completely upward compatible? There are very few issues, not that fmake is available from ports, I think = 99% of the compatibility are preserved I know about a couple of incompatibiliti= es that are bothering me in ports (for the infrastructure) but I would say thi= s is very much a corner case Bapt --O9T4zNOkGnr0n+A/ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlTajV0ACgkQ8kTtMUmk6EyP+QCfdt0cIK357EaAD/cCWMCBs3KH nEMAoLpV5H2BNrASUe7McksuZGAauuHA =NOp1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --O9T4zNOkGnr0n+A/--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150210225941.GU29891>