Isn't suckless supposed to use a portable subset of Makefile that's understood
by most make-programs?
Relying on gmake is usually a bad idea, even if it's present everywhere. I try
to keep my makefiles portable by - for instance - using
.c.o:
<rule>
instead of
%.o: %.c
<rule>
which would be a GNU extension.
Just sayin'. Writing portable makefiles is perfectly possible for our
simple needs. (In my opinion, it's even possible for projects far larger than
ours). Do yourself and us a favour and test your makefiles using bmake before
deploying. Packages exist for $LINUX_DISTRO!
