[9fans] Inferno's mk copy on Mac OS X vs Plan 9 from User Space

[9fans] Inferno's mk copy on Mac OS X vs Plan 9 from User Space

[David Leimbach]

The mk that comes with Inferno "fails to fail" when building Inferno
sources on my Intel Mac on Mac OS X.  The mk in Plan 9 from User Space
doesn't appear to have this problem.

Does anyone know of any specific differences between the two?

I wonder if I could use P9P's mk to help me get through my recompile
of Inferno for Mactels.

Dave

[9fans] Re: Inferno's mk copy on Mac OS X vs Plan 9 from User Space

[David Leimbach]

On 4/10/06, David Leimbach <leimy2k@gmail.com> wrote:
> The mk that comes with Inferno "fails to fail" when building Inferno
> sources on my Intel Mac on Mac OS X.  The mk in Plan 9 from User Space
> doesn't appear to have this problem.

I should be more clear here obviously... When the compilation fails mk
from Inferno keeps on trucking instead of dying.  This doesn't happen
with P9P mk.

In fact, P9P on Intel Macs doesn't work right now it seems.

>
> Does anyone know of any specific differences between the two?
>
> I wonder if I could use P9P's mk to help me get through my recompile
> of Inferno for Mactels.
>
> Dave
>

[9fans] Re: [inferno-list] Inferno's mk copy on Mac OS X vs Plan 9 from User Space

[Charles Forsyth]

> The mk that comes with Inferno "fails to fail" when building Inferno
> sources on my Intel Mac on Mac OS X.  The mk in Plan 9 from User Space
> doesn't appear to have this problem.

i'm fairly sure now that it's a difference between bash and other sh in handling -e,
that being the main environmental difference between systems on which a
little test mkfile fails (sh is bash) and those on which it works (sh is not bash, as on FreeBSD).

Re: [9fans] Re: [inferno-list] Inferno's mk copy on Mac OS X vs Plan 9 from User Space

[Taj Khattra]

> i'm fairly sure now that it's a difference between bash and other sh in handling -e,

http://code.dogmap.org/lintsh/ is a scary but useful list of such
incompatibilities for those condemned to deal with /bin/sh variants

[9fans] Re: [inferno-list] Inferno's mk copy on Mac OS X vs Plan 9 from User Space

[Charles Forsyth]

> i'm fairly sure now that it's a difference between bash and other sh in handling -e,

i'm certain: (command-list) doesn't cause bash to exit if the list returns an error
(even though the subsequent $? is indeed non-zero).  still, i see that
bash has a great many pages of other things to do.

Re: [9fans] Re: [inferno-list] Inferno's mk copy on Mac OS X vs Plan 9 from User Space

[erik quanstrom]

i think that p9p mk uses /bin/sh to execute commands for bootstrapping reasons
(it's rather difficult to mk rc with mk using rc for a command interpreter.)
but otherwise it would be nice if mk used rc.

p9p is faithful enough to plan 9 that often changing the mkfile is the most difficult
part of porting something from plan 9 to p9p.

- erik

On Tue Apr 11 20:16:54 CDT 2006, forsyth@terzarima.net wrote:
> > i'm fairly sure now that it's a difference between bash and other sh in handling -e,
>
> i'm certain: (command-list) doesn't cause bash to exit if the list returns an error
> (even though the subsequent $? is indeed non-zero).  still, i see that
> bash has a great many pages of other things to do.
>