Why does bsd.port.mk override make's search for Makefiles...?

Will Andrews 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
% make

Hmm.  However, it does not seem to use MAKEFILE from the
environment, it simply defines it as the makefile it's using.

% cat > Makefile2
	@echo hi
% 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
Type: application/pgp-signature
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 mailing list