Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Ever heard of mk? (was Re: Thoughts about "make")
Message-ID: <8859@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Oct-87 14:52:42 EST
Article-I.D.: utzoo.8859
Posted: Fri Oct 30 14:52:42 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 30-Oct-87 14:52:42 EST
References: <1700@botter.cs.vu.nl>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 13

> How is nmake "less general" than mk?. Is there anything you can do in mk
> that you couldn't do in nmake?

I'm not familiar enough with nmake to answer in detail, but as I understand
it, nmake knows a lot about C.  What happens if you try to use a seriously
different set of conventions for file naming etc.?  Mk has no built-in
knowledge to speak of, so it may need more work to customize for a particular
set of needs, but it has no built-in bias.

The capabilities of the two are probably equivalent in some formal sense.
-- 
PS/2: Yesterday's hardware today.    |  Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
OS/2: Yesterday's software tomorrow. | {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,utai}!utzoo!henry