gambatte

Perhaps, but I suspect writing a portable Makefile is not as difficult as you think. Speaking as a packager, I have to patch many CMake build systems for portability issues. And don’t even get me started on SCons. Autotools is better in that regard, but has many flaws of its own. Here’s an example of a portable Makefile I’ve contributed to a project which handles the common packaging issues (staging directories, cross‐compilation, parallel builds): https://github.com/sinamas/gambatte/pull/6/commits/8d6fffc2b... Compared to the original build system (two SConstructs): https://github.com/sinamas/gambatte/blob/master/gambatte_sdl... https://github.com/sinamas/gambatte/blob/master/libgambatte/...

Please do not use scons in your projects. Poorly written SConstructs are as common as poorly written Makefiles, and are more difficult to patch to work correctly because of all the magic that goes on under the hood. SCons has many issues that negatively affect packagers. Some are listed on the Gentoo wiki here: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/SCons As an OpenBSD packager, I hit many of those issues and a few more. For example, scons’s C preprocessor support is not great, and often brings in header dependencies that should be #ifdef'd out; when those unnecessary headers are removed during build (happens often on a machine bulk building packages), the build breaks. I’ve replaced SConstructs with Makefiles before. Typically it makes the build faster, simpler, and more portable, and is popular with other OS packagers. Example: https://github.com