Docs for Berkeley Make?

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Jonathon
> McKitrick
> Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 7:12 AM
> To: Greg 'groggy' Lehey
> Cc: freebsd-questions at freebsd.org; Ted Mittelstaedt
> Subject: Re: Docs for Berkeley Make?
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 01:23:23PM +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> : > Older revisions of the O'Reilly book cover the Berkeley make.
> :
> : No, unfortunately not.  Firstly this is a completely different book,
> : and secondly the old (Oram/Talbott) book also didn't cover Berkeley
> : Make.  There's a little in my book "Porting UNIX Software" (out of
> : print but available at http://www.lemis.com/grog/PUS/.  It's not very
> : much, though.
>
> Thanks for the link, I'll check it out.  I have a new project
> at work which
> will be developed under Linux, and I was hoping to write makefiles that
> would work under both OSes using the same make command.  But
> now I'm not
> so sure that will work.  I don't understand why BSD make and GNU make
> diverged so much.
>

They didn't diverge.  Both have a set of core commands that they
understand.
The difference is in the extra candy, which you really don't need or want
to use anyway, unless the project becomes gigantic.

There's only a handful of open source projects out there which justify
the extra
fancy crapoola in GNU make, in my experience.  Unfortunately there's
far too many of them that require gmake simply because the programmer
became enamored of some gimgaw in gmake that had a high coolness factor.
It is really sad to see software that consists of about 10 source files,
that has a makefile that's so non-standard that it requires gmake.

Ted