From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 29 04:41:42 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92E6916A46E for ; Tue, 29 May 2007 04:41:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rick@kiwi-computer.com) Received: from kiwi-computer.com (keira.kiwi-computer.com [63.224.10.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2101113C4B7 for ; Tue, 29 May 2007 04:41:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rick@kiwi-computer.com) Received: (qmail 22786 invoked by uid 2001); 29 May 2007 04:15:08 -0000 Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 23:15:08 -0500 From: "Rick C. Petty" To: Stephen Montgomery-Smith Message-ID: <20070529041508.GA22341@keira.kiwi-computer.com> References: <4659EF80.70100@math.missouri.edu> <20070527223048.GA37505@icarus.home.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070527223048.GA37505@icarus.home.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Looking for speed increases in "make index" and pkg_version for ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: rick-freebsd@kiwi-computer.com List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 04:41:42 -0000 On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 03:30:48PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > > That said, I'll ask this out in the open: am I the only one who sees the > benefit of GNU make in regards to this? There's a lot of built-in > functions in GNU make which could help in regards to ports. I have no > qualms with PMake per se, but if another tool gives us what we need, > then maybe we should consider the pros and cons of adapting that. > There's also CMake, which is incredibly fast. Yes, you are. What gmake benefits? Gmake does not provide the flexibility and power that pmake provides. Off the top of my head: gmake does not have ".for" loops, variable expansion modifiers, or even the "!=" shell command variable assigment. I use these in almost every Makefile I write, and the ports uses these things quite a bit. Also, gmake syntax is horrendous compared to pmake. People are already complaining about how ugly the ports makefiles are-- they'd be worse under gmake. Might as well rewrite the whole infrastructure in /bin/sh ... Also, there's the licensing issues. Remember-- any significant changes to this infrastructure has to work with the core utilities.. this leaves out gmake, python, ruby, etc. I doubt anyone will find anything as powerful as pmake without sacrificing the much-used flexibility it provides. -- Rick C. Petty