On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 14:06:41 +0000, Chris Rees writes:
>Are we planning to replace /usr/bin/make with bmake in the near future?

That was what I heard, but any such move is dependent on dealing with
ports.  The ~sjg/ports2bmake.tar.gz on freefall is the plan I came up
with after the above "requirement" was introduced at last BSDCan.

>If yes, what changes are we going to make to the ports tree to ensure
>that -CURRENT can still use it?

If you mean -current (aka head); the plan is to convert ports to bmake
syntax wrt to the 2 conflicting modifiers.  At my last test there are
just under 300 makefiles in ports that use the old modifiers.

Now for < head (ie. /usr/bin/make is an old version), the above ports
tree detects that bmake is not being used, and invokes a shell script
(bmake-sh) to do what was asked.

That script will look for bmake and if necessary build/install it.
To do that, it creates a temp copy of Mk/*.mk converted back to the old
syntax so that the old make can build and install bmake, and then the
old system is on par with -current.

That's what I meant by "ports will take care of itself".
The main gap btw in the above, is if a user who does not have privs to
install bmake, is the only person trying to do something with ports.

The above plan needs to be approved by portmgr, and obviouslty a test
run of building all ports is needed (possibly more than one).

Does that help?
--sjg
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to