minar@reed.bitnet (Nelson Minar,(???)) (06/03/90)
What do people out there in net.land use for a make utility? Im interested specifically in people who do lots of C programming from the command line (not an integrated environment) and/or assembly programming. For various bizarre reasons, I do not like the make utility that comes with Turbo C 2.0. As such, I've been searching around looking for better makes. (porting GNU make looked hellish). Currently, I've landed on a utility that claims to be a more-or-less direct port of standard UN*X make, with some obvious MS-DOS corrections. I was fairly happy with it until a couple of make files (like the one that came with Fractint v12 source code) had to be diddled to work, and that I could never get a .asm.obj suffix rule to work at all. So, I'm not totally happy with this one. What do people out there use? I would think an ideal solution would be a free/shareware utility that looked as close to UN*X make as possible, but I'm interested in anything.
darcy@druid.uucp (D'Arcy J.M. Cain) (06/04/90)
In article <15037@reed.UUCP> minar@reed.bitnet (Nelson Minar) writes: >For various bizarre reasons, I do not like the make utility that comes with >Turbo C 2.0. As such, I've been searching around looking for better makes. >(porting GNU make looked hellish). > I understand that GNU Make has already been ported to DOS. If this is so I strongly suggest that. Failing that get one that includes source. I do all my development (both DOS and Unix) on my Unix system with vpix. I have banged on GNU Make until it now knows how to make .obj and .exe files from either .c or .asm files and I now can use a single source tree to create executables for both systems. This would have been clumsy and difficult if not impossible under a make that I couldn't modify. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain (darcy@druid) | Government: D'Arcy Cain Consulting | Organized crime with an attitude West Hill, Ontario, Canada | (416) 281-6094 |
NU013809@NDSUVM1.BITNET (Greg Wettstein) (06/04/90)
This originally started started on comp.sys.ibm.pc.binaries but I have been
thinking that I should post an announcement to this newsgroup as well.
I have a working port of GNU Make to the MS-DOS environment which seems to
be running most of my internal makesfiles as well as most external ones
I have thrown at it. I would still consider the port to be beta in nature
as I needed to get a Make running and when I got it doing what I wanted to
do I didn't take time to make sure that all the obscure bugs were worked
out.
The big limitations right now are the amount of memory required by the
executable (100K) and the fact that it is currently working in medium model.
I have ported a lot of GNU software to MS-DOS and going to large model is
always worth about a day or two of time. Since the FSF boys are used to
working in large flat linear address spaces with (size long == char *) I
suppose this is understandable.
Since I announced that the GNU port was available I have received a steady
stream of mail asking for it to be released. Ian Stewart sent me mail this
morning and is sendig me an isolated version of his swapping code. I will
incorporate this and take a stab at large model, if things go well I will
send an executable to Mr. Davidsen and he can take it from there. Stay
tuned for further announcements.
As always,
Dr. G.W. Wettstein
NU013809@VM1.NoDak.EDU
'The truest mark of a man's wisdom is his ability to listen to other men
expound their wisdom.'venkat@matrix.UUCP (D Venkatrangan) (06/04/90)
In article <15037@reed.UUCP> minar@reed.bitnet (Nelson Minar) writes: > >What do people out there in net.land use for a make utility? Im interested I use PolyMake, version 3.2 -- excellent choice for large projects. Its builtin rules are great to get around many of the syntactic quirks of MS complier,linker and lib manager.
bambi@kirk.nmg.bu.oz (David J. Hughes) (06/05/90)
From article <15037@reed.UUCP>, by minar@reed.bitnet (Nelson Minar,(???)): > > What do people out there in net.land use for a make utility? Im interested > specifically in people who do lots of C programming from the command line > (not an integrated environment) and/or assembly programming. > > For various bizarre reasons, I do not like the make utility that comes with > Turbo C 2.0. As such, I've been searching around looking for better makes. > (porting GNU make looked hellish). Have you had a look at PD Make. The latest version (1.6 I think) was posted to comp.sources.misc a couple of days ago. It was written to work under MSDos as well as UNIX - and the best part is that it is in the public domain. "See it at an archive server near you" bambi +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | David J. Hughes (AKA bambi) | bambi@kowande.bu.oz.au | | Systems Programmer | bambi@kowande.bu.oz.au@uunet.uu.net | | Network Management Group | ..!uunet!munnari!kowande.bu.oz.au!bambi | | Bond University, Gold Coast | Phone : +61 75 951111 | | Queensland, Australia 4229 | Fax : +61 75 951456 | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+