Here's a few more suggestions:

dmdbuild - Digital Mars D Build(er)
dsbuild - D Source Build(er)

dmerge - Merge D sources togather
dprism - gathers all D sources into one focal-point executable
deploy - build D sources for deployment
dpkg   - Package together D sources

David L.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Dare to reach for the Stars...Dare to Dream, Build, and Achieve!"
-------------------------------------------------------------------

David L. Davis wrote:
> Here's a few more suggestions:
> 
> dmdbuild - Digital Mars D Build(er)
> dsbuild - D Source Build(er)
> 
> dmerge - Merge D sources togather
> dprism - gathers all D sources into one focal-point executable
> deploy - build D sources for deployment
> dpkg   - Package together D sources

buildy [ pronounced Buil-Dee ] :D

David L. Davis wrote:
> dpkg   - Package together D sources

Heh... I don't think many Debian users will like that one (Google it unless that was a joke)

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 15:27:34 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:

> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>> "Carlos Santander" <csantander619@gmail.com> wrote in message news:eagiin$1lad$2@digitaldaemon.com...
>> 
>>> freeagle escribió:
>>>>> Another vote for dbuild.
>>>>>
>>>> yup
>>> Same here.
>> 
>> And again.
> 
> I like dbuild too. Some googling on dbuild gives:
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/13909.html
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ctrl_dbuild
> 
> "dbuild" seems to be some sort of Debian utility:
> 
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-arm/1999/02/msg00003.html
> 
> http://www.openlaszlo.org/pipermail/laszlo-builds/2006-June/000136.html

no, a search for the dbuild package don't give anything. http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?suite=all&subword=1&exact=&arch=any&section=all&case=insensitive&keywords=debuild&searchon=names

but there is a debuild package.

Frits van Bommel wrote:
> David L. Davis wrote:
> 
>> dpkg   - Package together D sources
> 
> 
> Heh... I don't think many Debian users will like that one (Google it unless that was a joke)

lol, who would think that name was taken?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dpkg
dpkg is the base of the Debian package management system

"Frits van Bommel" <fvbommel@REMwOVExCAPSs.nl> wrote in message news:eagv3q$2l7i$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> David L. Davis wrote:
>> dpkg   - Package together D sources
>
> Heh... I don't think many Debian users will like that one (Google it unless that was a joke)

Opps! I was just brain-storming a few names (as Derek had ask us to do)...I didn't really check Google on it. Thanks, for pointing it out.

David L.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Dare to reach for the Stars...Dare to Dream, Build, and Achieve!"
-------------------------------------------------------------------

MKoD: http://spottedtiger.tripod.com/D_Language/D_Main_XP.html

duild-o?

I like dbuild.

KB

"Derek" <derek@psyc.ward> wrote in message news:jq6ezl23l08e.1qvo0qdaexhy0.dlg@40tude.net...
> According to some, the utility progam that I'm responsible for, currently called 'Build' has a poor choice as a name. So may I please ask the D community for nominations of a new name for the utility?
>
> I quote ...
> "
> build is rather common and collision prone name. I'm not even talking
> about
> googlin' it. In *nix environments you can expect other tools to use
> "build"
> binary or Linux user to use build as an alias or something like that.
>
> While I'm doing D-related packages for ArchLinux? - I can say that many
> package maintainers (especially those with maaany packages) will change
> binary name from build to something else. The problems is - it should be
> one, standard name. It is very important for feature build/configure
> scripts to use one hardcoded name that will not change. Imagine that
> debian
> people will rename build to dbuild and suse to dlang-build. Building
> project using build will be mess then - no simple instructions can be give
> to common linux user and dummy Makefiles (that will just run build
> transparently will get complicated. Things gets complicated -> D fans
> loose
> much.
>
> If build wants to be standard D tool on Linux it has to change binary name
> and stay with it.
> "
>
> I have no investment in any specific name for the utility, so give me some ideas. I'll attempt to sort out a consensus for a new name but if I can't I'll just pick one anyhow.
>
> -- 
> Derek Parnell
> Melbourne, Australia
> "Down with mediocrity!"

Derek wrote:
> According to some, the utility progam that I'm responsible for, currently
> called 'Build' has a poor choice as a name. So may I please ask the D
> community for nominations of a new name for the utility?
> 
> I quote ...
> "
> build is rather common and collision prone name. I'm not even talking about
> googlin' it. In *nix environments you can expect other tools to use "build"
> binary or Linux user to use build as an alias or something like that. 
> 
> While I'm doing D-related packages for ArchLinux? - I can say that many
> package maintainers (especially those with maaany packages) will change
> binary name from build to something else. The problems is - it should be
> one, standard name. It is very important for feature build/configure
> scripts to use one hardcoded name that will not change. Imagine that debian
> people will rename build to dbuild and suse to dlang-build. Building
> project using build will be mess then - no simple instructions can be give
> to common linux user and dummy Makefiles (that will just run build
> transparently will get complicated. Things gets complicated -> D fans loose
> much. 
> 
> If build wants to be standard D tool on Linux it has to change binary name
> and stay with it.
> "
> 
> I have no investment in any specific name for the utility, so give me some
> ideas. I'll attempt to sort out a consensus for a new name but if I can't
> I'll just pick one anyhow.
> 

Here are some...

Thesaurus.com + lame 'd' naming scheme, remove D for a unique name...

* d-construct
* d-raise
* d-rear
* d-synth
* d-velop (DeeVelop aka develop)
* d-wax
* d-amass
* d-chunk
* d-horde
* d-heap
* d-annex
* d-beef
* d-sweet

Microsoft Naming Scheme...
* Xbuild
* Xdevelop
* xena
* xbuild3.14 (hey, it worked for xbox360, substitute any number that is 'cool' and 'hip')
* xotus (exodus)
* xdbuild #

Unique names...
* snowball
* avalanche
* gather
* bigbang
* ehorizon (event horizon)

That's all I can think of for now.
~ Clay

"clayasaurus" <clayasaurus@gmail.com> wrote in message news:eah7hs$2t71$1@digitaldaemon.com...

> Here are some...

> * d-beef

Yes.  That is IT.

Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> "clayasaurus" <clayasaurus@gmail.com> wrote in message news:eah7hs$2t71$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>> Here are some...
> 
>> * d-beef
> 
> Yes.  That is IT. 
> 
> 

Where's d-beef?