[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Nano-devel] nano uses an unportable Makefile construct.

From: Chris Allegretta
Subject: Re: [Nano-devel] nano uses an unportable Makefile construct.
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 21:28:03 -0500

Now now, take the over-the-top advocacy to #oswars on IRC.
Portability is desired when it does not become overly burdensome.
Instead of supporting the HPUXism that Jay emailed about earlier,
should I tell him to download a PA-RISC Linux distribution?  This is
effectively vendor tie-in, which as a Free Software advocate I am
generally against.  Said more succinctly, unnecessary dependencies are
teh suck.

Sorry I haven't been able to get to this yet Eitan, I have been a
little short on time.   I'll do  my best to tackle this before the
beginning of next week.

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Mike Frysinger <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Thursday 19 February 2009 20:46:01 Eitan Adler wrote:
>> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > On Thursday 19 February 2009 19:40:21 Eitan Adler wrote:
>> >> The use of a $< outside a suffix rule is a GNU make extension and breaks
>> >> with other make implementations.  This needs to be replaced with $?, or
>> >> better yet, spell out the source file explicitly.
>> >
>> > or better yet, go install GNU make
>> Why require an entirely new program for a) something that can fixed by
>> one small change b) can be fixed upstream?
>> Why use a vendor specific extension when using a portable method is
>> trivial?
> GNU make is available everywhere.  install it and be done.  i may also point
> out nano is a GNU project.
> -mike
> _______________________________________________
> Nano-devel mailing list
> address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]