Re: zmailer-2.99.25 router problem

[sterling@netapp.com (Bruce Sterling Woodcock)]

>  > > 
>  > > why are the "MAKE=make" lines necessary at all?
>  > 
>  > 	In some rare occasions the system default "make" command
>  > 	does not do exactly what you want, and instead you want to
>  > 	use BSD pmake, BSD make, GNU make, or some other...
>  > 
> 
> which is exactly what the "MAKE=make" lines cause to be difficult,
> unless i don't understand something.  
> 
> normally, if i run "gmake", then gmake will start more "gmake"s for lower
> level makefiles.  but if you've put "MAKE=make" in those files, the default
> inheritance gets overridden, no?

Currently, you would set "MAKE=gmake" in your toplevel Makefile, and it
runs the subsequent makes with "make MAKE=$(MAKE)".  Basically, the
make command allows you to specify the environment variable on the
command line.  However, I don't think this is any different in setting
MAKE in the Makefile and just letting it be "inherited"/"exported"
naturally.  Unfortunately, I believe some makes don't export this
MAKE variable to the child environments.

Anyway, the problem I had was that if the parent make called a make with
MAKE=make on the command line, and that child make then called another
make with MAKE=make on the command line, make got confused.  What the
author was suggesting to solve this whole mess is to simply have the
MAKE defined in the Config files, so that when the lower-level Makefiles
are made, they already have the appropriate "MAKE=xxx" line in them,
and we no longer have to explicitly state "make MAKE=make" or whatever
in the actual Makefiles.

Bruce

-- 
Bruce Sterling Woodcock --- Systems Administrator ][ sterling@netapp.com