Re: Can fmake be deleted?

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,
>> =

>> I've seen that you've copied all the make tests over to usr.bin/make wit=
h a comment that they are fmake-only. According to your question they are t=
o be removed.
>> =

>> Isn't bmake based on some version of fmake? In fact several of these tes=
ts 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 te=
sts that apply to bmake?
> =

> so this brings up the question on my mind which is;
> =

> 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 an=
d slightly better syntax for some things (and fewer bugs) at the cost of so=
me growing pains where the two were incompatible, or we had bugs in fmake t=
hat we accidentally depended on.

fmake remains in the tree as a transition measure. The next step is to remo=
ve the (already broken) support for building world with fmake. Once somebod=
y has an actual, working fmake port, and some time has passed, we  can reor=
bit 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
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"