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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
