From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Fri,  2 Dec 2011 09:55:12 -0800
From: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAP6exYL0aHigRsZqHkwOc-aAnNuqUM0mfe-xU7vRfxqixrV6Zw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.1.10.1112020930470.91234@peregrin.orthanc.ca>
References: <alpine.OSX.1.10.1112011153090.649@peregrinwifi.orthanc.ca>
	<6c4047deda8f6556c4f68b34b8f78dd6@proxima.alt.za>
	<20111202143311.GD7640@dinah>
	<CAP6exYL0aHigRsZqHkwOc-aAnNuqUM0mfe-xU7vRfxqixrV6Zw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (OSX 962 2008-03-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 4c0e7b4a-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

>> modify ape/make.

I was just waiting for this :-P

Please do NOT fuck with ape/make.  As the paper says, APE has become more
of a tool to write conforming ANSI / POSIX code vs. porting the stuff to
Plan 9.  Please don't take apes' virginity.

If people insist on inflicting gmake upon us, fine. I guess.  But please
(please?) don't screw the ape: deposit it in /$cputype/bin/gmake instead.

And now that the camel is firmly in the tent, we might as well
create a <foo>/camel hierarchy to parallel <foo>/ape, for all the
camel cruft (i.e. /$cputype/camel/make vs. /$cputype/bin/gmake).

Then, people who want to ride camels through the desert can run bsh(1) to
obtain a suitably inhospitable environment.  (bsh as in baking-hot shell,
although bs(1) seems like a reasonable alternative.)