[MITgcm-devel] sun os

[Martin Losch]

Hi again,
personally I am perfectly fine with gmake; as someone said before, it's 
what everybody has (or can have). It's just another thing to remember 
when you do something on a Sun (not that I seriously intend to do so). 
It's similar to the NetCDF discussion: if something doesn't work on a 
particular machine, that's fine, as long as there is an explanation for 
it and an obvious way to fix it. It's probably enough to emphasize the 
make/gmake issue in the documentation, for example on
http://mitgcm.org/pelican/online_documents/node90.html

Martin

On Sep 29, 2004, at 2:43 PM, Ed Hill wrote:

> On Wed, 2004-09-29 at 02:51, Martin Losch wrote:
>> My favorite operating system! Yesterday I tried to compile one
>> experiment (basically exp4) on one of our SunOS computers, but it
>> failed at the make-step (both with the default optfile and with
>> sunos_sun4u_f77 where MAKE=gmake is specified):
>>>> make
>> compiled the c-code and then tried to link, of course it failed,
>> because no fortran source had been compiled.
>> I then found out that gmake works. I remember that there was a
>> discussion about that, but what's the status? Is the inapt sun-user
>> (that's me) supposed to know that gmake has to be used instead of 
>> make?
>> On
>>> http://mitgcm.org/pelican/online_documents/node90.html
>> "make" is still the command to use.
>> (It was quite embarrassing that after I have been claiming that the
>> MITgcm "compiles and runs everywhere without any problems", it didn't
>> compile and I didn't know why (took me some time to remember gmake)
>
>
> Hi Martin,
>
> What can we say?  For starters, theres no comprehensive standard for 
> the
> 'make' syntax so no one can claim that their 'make' implementation is
> 100% standards compliant.  And the various ("old Unix vendor") 'make'
> implementations are _infamous_ for having been somewhat incompatible
> with each other.  Its the old "fracturing of Unix" story...
>
> So the MITgcm Makefile has gained a lot of features over the past year
> (including the ability to build without any tweaking on Mac OS X and
> Windows with Cygwin).  This increased complexity means that some (not
> all!) older 'make' implementations can't handle it.  And I'm sorry.
> We've chose Gnu Make as our de-facto standard because its available
> basically everywhere and it supports the syntax we need.  And if you're
> unlucky enough to be on a machine that doesn't have Gnu Make or a
> sufficiently compatible make already installed, a local build is this
> easy:
>
>   $  wget ftp://aeneas.mit.edu/pub/gnu/make/make-3.80.tar.gz
>   $  tar -xzf make-3.80.tar.gz
>   $  cd make-3.80
>   $  ./configure
>   $  make
>
> Also, theres a comment about 'make' versus 'gmake' at
>
>   http://mitgcm.org/pelican/online_documents/node92.html
>
> and we'll add more information to the docs during the upcoming DocFest
> (in mid-October).
>
> Ed
>
> -- 
> Edward H. Hill III, PhD
> office:  MIT Dept. of EAPS;  Rm 54-1424;  77 Massachusetts Ave.
>              Cambridge, MA 02139-4307
> emails:  eh3 at mit.edu                ed at eh3.com
> URLs:    http://web.mit.edu/eh3/    http://eh3.com/
> phone:   617-253-0098
> fax:     617-253-4464
>
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://dev.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel