labath wrote: I'm going to jump in here, since I think this was my idea. :)
I actually believe that preferring `gmake` *is* the right thing to do because we are (for whatever reason) looking for *GNU* make, and `gmake` (unlike `make`, it seems) is very likely to be the a "gnu make" -- if it exists. It's true that this would mean we use the name "gmake" on systems that usually call it "make" but so what... maybe we'll educate some people. Conditionalizing it on the platform (particularly on the *target* platform) seems wrong. I think it be better to stick to the "gmake, make" order, and then check whether the thing we found was actually a GNU make (through `make --version` I guess) -- if it's not then issue a warning/error or whatever. > We could say we require a "GNU compatible" make but I didn't want to get into > the weeds of whether Mac's make is technically GNU compatible or just happens > to have all the features we need. FWIW, the Mac make is not just "GNU compatible". It *is* GNU: ``` $ which make /usr/bin/make $ make --version GNU Make 3.81 Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. This program built for i386-apple-darwin11.3.0 ``` (amusingly it thinks it's an i386 binary even though I'm running an arm macbook) https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/119573 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
