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

Re: make-bsd, pmake, and /usr/share/mk, oh my

On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 03:28:24PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
>    On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 03:02:26PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
>    > 
>    >    So... pmake claims to be "BSD 4.4 make", and in fact appears to
>    >    be a not- unreasonable copy of the NetBSD make sources. Is there
>    >    any particular reason that the make-bsd and netbsd-mk packages
>    >    in the chroot can't be replaced by the Debian-standard pmake
>    >    package, if it gets updated (it's a few revisions behind, it
>    >    looks like, but that's a wishlist bug for the author and easy to
>    >    patch against for us).
>    > 
>    > 
>    > i don't know how you're building anything, but it's not exactly
>    > uncommon for a modern netbsd make to be required to build it. that's
>    > why the first
> this "build it" means "build netbsd", BTW.

Ah. Yes.

>    > thing our shiny new src/build.sh does it build a copy of
>    > src/usr.bin/make without using make :-)
>    Uhm. Debian specifies GNU make for all debian/rules files, and pmake
>    is a Debian package (and thus has a rules file, to build it...)
>    The point is that the NetBSD chroot has packages for 'make-bsd' and
>    'netbsd-mk' which provide what appears to be a nearly identical
>    overlap of files (modulo version differences; pmake's copy is older
>    than the 1.5.2 make sources).
>    The question was... is there any reason to keep these, or can we
>    simply declare a build-dependancy on pmake for building the few things
>    we take from NetBSD sources? (IE, libc, kernel, etc - stuff I'm trying
>    to do the packages for, now...)
> are you going to replicate the build processes for, eg libc and the
> kernel? these are the things i mean that often change and depend on a
> newer netbsd /usr/bin/make...

Yes. There is no other way I can think of to natively (IE, within Debian
NetBSD) get the packages, other than to build them - which requires the
BSD make.

> you can try to use pmake! but it would be advisable to also try to get it
> upgraded to a much more recently (read: -current, 1.5 branch is now >2
> years old) version. i'm merely pointing out where i know dangers may lie
> :-)

Well, let's put it this way: I'm building the 1.5.2 kernel, so using the
/usr/share/mk files from the 1.5.2 source tree probably isn't a bad thing.

As for -current... I couldn't even build a kernel that would boot on my
machine, after 3 tries. So I'll leave the bleeding edge to someone else,
and build tools that can handle what I have to work with.

This leads to the question of keeping pmake in sync with the source version
that it's meant to build. Perhaps I need to do a pmake-<version> instead,
make it conflict with pmake, and figure out how to do it saner, later...
Joel Baker                           System Administrator - lightbearer.com
lucifer@lightbearer.com              http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/

Reply to: