Re: make vs. gmake in 6-CURRENT...

Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
[ ... ]
> Revision 1.16 of the port Makefile doesn't build a growisofs executable.

It doesn't?  Ah, thank you, I see:

[ ... ]
c++ -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe   -fno-exceptions -c -o growisofs_mmc.o 
growisofs_mmc.cpp
cc -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe    -c -o growisofs.o growisofs.c
c++ -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe   -fno-exceptions -c -o dvd+rw-format.o 
dvd+rw-format.cpp

...under 6, versus this under 4.10:

c++  -O -pipe    -fno-exceptions -c -o growisofs_mmc.o growisofs_mmc.cpp
cc -O -pipe   -c -o growisofs.o growisofs.c
c++  -O -pipe    -fno-exceptions -o growisofs growisofs_mmc.o growisofs.o   -lcam
c++  -O -pipe    -fno-exceptions -c -o dvd+rw-format.o dvd+rw-format.cpp

OK.

> If we don't have the ability to reorganize things within the distfile
> (because, e.g. the creator of dvd+rw-tools distfile does not target just
> FreeBSD), using gmake seems to be the way to go.

I don't have an objection to depending on gmake, but I would prefer not to add 
dependencies which are not really necessary.  In other words, I'd still like 
to know what changed in make from FreeBSD-4 & 5 to 6.  :-)

As to the author, he's been reasonably responsive to adding an env variable or 
two to facilitate FreeBSD port preferences (such as not installing setuid by 
default) and to using ?= rather than = in defining CC and such.

The port's primary audience is Linux, but FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD, 
Solaris, etc, are all recognized as supported platforms.

-- 
-Chuck