On Thu, Sep 15, 2016, at 10:56 AM, Evan Gates wrote: > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 10:29 PM, Anselm R Garbe <garb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Nevertheless, after an excursion to sh for several years, I'm kind of > > favouring 9base/rc again, after all. For stali I now tend to adopt rc > > as primary scripting language for the target system as well. For the > > build host environment I would rather stick to sh+make instead of > > rc+mk. We have to live with the fact that a build host environment is > > poisoned with crap bloat to hell anyways.
My two cents... Granted that rc+mk are far superior to /bin/sh+GNU make, but if there are already 3rd party (i.e. not from suckless) packages/programs that depend on sh+gmake, you might as well just use them as is. Doing a whole lot of rewriting work just for purity's sake doesn't accomplish much. So rc+mk can be used for suckless projects and new code in Stali and so forth, but don't try to do huge amount of work to rewrite.
