Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!oliveb!amdahl!rtech!wrs!roger
From: roger@wrs.com (Roger Rohrbach)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Anyone know of a "better" 'make' than vanilla System-V's?.
Message-ID: <1257@wrs.wrs.com>
Date: 17 Oct 90 19:50:06 GMT
References: <1990Oct3.000440.5275@hades.ausonics.oz.au> <677@isgtec.UUCP> <1990Oct12.124029.6545@pdn.paradyne.com>
Sender: newsmgr@wrs.COM
Lines: 31
Nntp-Posting-Host: kymijoki

locke@nike.paradyne.com (Richard Locke) writes:

> I've heard a rumor that AT&T will be marketing an previously internal
> version of an improved, new 'make' sometime in the foreseeable future.


  This improved make has been available through the AT&T Toolchest since
1985 as "nmake".  I used it for several years to build a huge DBMS on scores
of Unix systems.  We had to port it to do so, and the code was crappy, and
it was a pain.  But the GREAT improvement in functionality and the ad vantage
of having uniform behavior everywhere makes this the only way to go.


lowell@tc.fluke.COM (Lowell Skoog) writes:

> SunOS 4.0 make has a `.KEEP_STATE' feature, which I have seen in no
> other version of make (unfortunately).
> It also records command dependencies


  Nmake does both of these as well.


  I think GNU make may incorporate a lot of these ideas; if so, it's
a cheap alternative.

-- 
Roger Rohrbach                                  sun!wrs!roger    roger@wrs.com
- Eddie sez: ----------------------------------------------- (c) 1986, 1990 -.
|   {o >o                                                                     |
|    \<>) "If I were a gas, I'd be inert!"                                    |