[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Naming (Re: Unified packages. )

On Sun, 20 Aug 2000, Hubert Feyrer wrote:

> On Sun, 20 Aug 2000, Adrian Filipi-Martin wrote:
> We should take into consideration that bmake != /usr/bin/make of any BSD
> system. make(1) seems to different on these systems, unfortunately. (Or so
> I've heared, e.g. when it comes to variable modifiers: ${FOO:x...}

	Maybe I'm using the wrong name.  I mean the flavor of make that the
the BSD's share.  Unless I'm mistaken they stem from one ancestor.  Correct
me if I'm wrong.  

	I know that lots of the stuff in the current makefiles will blow
chunks if you used some other make like gmake.  I'm not interested in
making this work under gmake at this time (if at all).

> Good point, and to repeat someone which I talked this over with: we should
> aim for the most advanced pkg technologies, not the least common
> denominator.

	Speaking of advanced packaging tools, has anyone seen the fabled
install/packaging tools that Jordan had someone in Russia write?  

	I think we have two tasks at hand.  One is the makefile portion
(fetching, patching, building,...) and the other is the binary package
management tools (pkg_{create,add, ...etc}).  I agree that other packaging
tools might be nice down the line.  Doesn't solaris use sw-tools like
HP-UX?  For now, I'm hoping to start with the "native" tools.  I don't
think anyone has created any horribly incompatible variations to the pkg_*

[ adrian@ubergeeks.com -- Ubergeeks Consulting -- http://www.ubergeeks.com/ ]

To unsubscribe: send mail to <majordomo@unixathome.org>
with "unsubscribe bsdports" in the body of the message