From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:11:22 CST."
	<CABwHSOuJ9thp9xhHYVK+0OM1_k9WRUCipxFqUdETJHcm8KAEXg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABwHSOukAs36eJ2zA2Q=yeaN53hWAsm2EPOSZJmkOHkhTwXQBA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABwHSOuJ9thp9xhHYVK+0OM1_k9WRUCipxFqUdETJHcm8KAEXg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 08:40:42 -0800
From: Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com>
Message-Id: <20131218164042.524C6B827@mail.bitblocks.com>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Problem with mk
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9fabdc6a-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:11:22 CST Blake McBride <blake@mcbride.name> wrote:
> >
> > Somehow Unix or GNU "make" doesn't mix up buffered stdout with unbuffered
> > stderr output.  They remain in order so the total out of make and all of
> > the commands are shown in order and in context.  You know, so a human can
> > understand it.  mk appears not to handle this the same.  stdout output
> > and stderr output are totally out of sequence making it very, very
> > difficult to understand what is going on.
> >
> >
> mk should flush stdout after completion each command.

Just as plan9 is not unix, mk is not make. Rather than expect
it to behave like make, it pays to understand how mk works,
may be by experimenting with little mkfiles.