On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 10:01:01AM -0800, Simon J. Gerraty wrote:
> Ok, the OpenBSD make is very different to NetBSD's now.
> There are lots of features in NetBSD's and likely OpenBSD's that
> are not present in the other.  This is at least partly my fault,
> a few years ago when I added the ODE modifiers to NetBSD I didn't
> note that OpenBSD was using some of the same modifier names for
> different purposes.

Well, I am not shy of getting the best features of the makes out there
in one make. :)
I'll definately pluck your version for interesting features. ;)

> I'm told that OpenBSD's make performs well, but other than that,
> cannot tell you which is more suitable for your project.
> I can tell you though that most of the cool magic in the NetBSD
> makefiles probably won't work.  So read your make(1) carefully.

Well, I am a FreeBSD guy originally so I am not that familiar with most
of NetBSD's customizations yet.

> Also, please don't call the thing "bmake" - I've been using that name
> for at least 10 years for the portable make derrived from NetBSD's.
> For the last few years bmake has tracked NetBSD make very closely
> since where possible/sensible I make changes to NetBSD make and
> re-sync bmake rather than allowing bmake to diverge.

I've only recently became aware of bmake (yours that is).  I've used
bmake for the past 2 years since I found pmake too confusing.
Reason I used bmake in the first place was to denote its BSD lineage
without any preference for a particular BSD.
Back to the drawing board for a 'new' name.  Suggestions welcome. :)

Simon, interested in discussing back and forth some ideas I had on improving
make and pulling it kicking and screaming into the 21st century?

Thanks for the comments and explanations,

--Jeroen