Why does bsd.port.mk override make's search for Makefiles...?
will at csociety.org
Fri Jul 9 11:36:45 PDT 2004
On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 01:37:08PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> Hmm, you're right. OK, I am more literate now, and I believe I understand
> the problem mentioned in the PR, I'm just not sure I agree with renaming
> MAKEFILE to MAKE_FILE everywhere.
You raise a good point. However, the desire is not to conflict
with _any_ standard, and MAKE_FILE seems to fit the bill.
I would say the lack of a mention of MAKEFILE in make(1) is a bug
in the man page, because:
% cat > Makefile
Hmm. However, it does not seem to use MAKEFILE from the
environment, it simply defines it as the makefile it's using.
% cat > Makefile2
% env MAKEFILE=Makefile2 make
% make -f Makefile2
I'm not sure what's going on here. I will have to make some time
to investigate PR#30331 more.
> ...so which standard do we want to choose from? :-) Does POSIX say
> anything (useful) about what make should do with regard to $MAKEFILE...?
I am not concerned with maintaining make(1) - BTDT.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20040709/096bdb19/attachment.bin
More information about the freebsd-ports