GNU Make vs SemaphoreCI comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
GNU Logo
230 views|189 comparisons
80% willing to recommend
SemaphoreCI Logo
252 views|216 comparisons
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between GNU Make and SemaphoreCI based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about GitLab, Jenkins, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in Build Automation.
To learn more, read our detailed Build Automation Report (Updated: April 2024).
770,292 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "There is no price for this product. No licensing. It’s open-source."
  • "GNU Make is free and open source software."
  • More GNU Make Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    Ranking
    25th
    out of 41 in Build Automation
    Views
    230
    Comparisons
    189
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    23rd
    out of 41 in Build Automation
    Views
    252
    Comparisons
    216
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Buyer's Guide
    Build Automation
    April 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about GitLab, Jenkins, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in Build Automation. Updated: April 2024.
    770,292 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Comparisons
    Jenkins logo
    Compared 72% of the time.
    Bazel logo
    Compared 28% of the time.
    Jenkins logo
    Compared 37% of the time.
    CircleCI logo
    Compared 37% of the time.
    GitHub Actions logo
    Compared 27% of the time.
    Learn More
    SemaphoreCI
    Video Not Available
    Overview
    Make is a tool which controls the generation of executables and other non-source files of a program from the program's source files.
    With Semaphore, you can easily automate the process of software testing and delivery in the cloud. It is designed to be easy to use and engineered for high performance. It automatically test your app after every change, thus finding bugs before they reach your users. Whenever somebody pushes new code to GitHub or Bitbucket, Semaphore immediately runs all tests, along with any security and style checks that you’ve defined. Once you start using Semaphore, every build automatically becomes a part of the GitHub or Bitbucket pull request review process. It tests multiple projects and branches simultaneously as you push new commits. By default Semaphore automatically builds every new branch in your Git repository. Semaphore’s custom-made platform for Docker equips you with unrestricted access to latest Docker CLI toolchain, including container image caching. Safety net provided by automated CI builds: check. Next up: move even faster with continuous deployment. With a unified workflow for the entire team, Semaphore enables the team to roll-in revisions and gain feedback faster by automatically deploying verified versions of code.
    Sample Customers
    Information Not Available
    Dribble, Art Sy, 500px, General Assembly, CrunchBase, Lexmark
    Buyer's Guide
    Build Automation
    April 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about GitLab, Jenkins, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in Build Automation. Updated: April 2024.
    770,292 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    GNU Make is ranked 25th in Build Automation while SemaphoreCI is ranked 23rd in Build Automation. GNU Make is rated 8.2, while SemaphoreCI is rated 0.0. The top reviewer of GNU Make writes "Full-featured syntax allows building strategies as simple or as complex as needed". On the other hand, GNU Make is most compared with Jenkins and Bazel, whereas SemaphoreCI is most compared with Jenkins, CircleCI and GitHub Actions.

    See our list of best Build Automation vendors.

    We monitor all Build Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.