GNU Make vs GitHub Actions comparison

GitHub and GNU are both solutions in the Build Automation category. GitHub is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.5, while GNU is ranked #16 with an average rating of 9.0. GitHub holds a 8.7% mindshare in BA, compared to GNU’s 1.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of GitHub users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of GNU users who would recommend it.

GitHub Actions

Read 23 GitHub Actions reviews

2,950 Views
2,950 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

GNU Make

Read 6 GNU Make reviews

412 Views
396 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

GitHub Actions

GNU Make

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 5, 2025

GNU Make and GitHub Actions compete in automating build processes. GitHub Actions appears to have the upper hand due to its integrated CI/CD capabilities.

Features: GNU Make offers build dependencies management, task automation, dependency avoidance in building targets. GitHub Actions provides CI/CD pipelines, parallel workflow support, integrates with GitHub repositories.

Room for Improvement: GNU Make could improve integration options, user interface, cloud capabilities. GitHub Actions might enhance its setup simplicity outside GitHub, offer more third-party integrations, provide extended offline support.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: GitHub Actions benefits from seamless deployment within GitHub and extensive community support. GNU Make requires manual setup, relying on file-based configurations without an integrated support ecosystem.

Pricing and ROI: GNU Make is free and has no setup costs, attractive for budget-focused projects. GitHub Actions, free for public repositories, may incur costs for private usage but offers a favorable ROI by improving workflow efficiency.

To learn more, read our detailed GNU Make vs. GitHub Actions Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

GNU Make vs. GitHub Actions

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

GitHub Actions

Ranking in Build Automation

3rd

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

5.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

GNU Make

Ranking in Build Automation

16th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Build Automation category, the mindshare of GitHub Actions is 8.7%, down from 10.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GNU Make is 1.5%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Build Automation Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
GitHub Actions	8.7%
GNU Make	1.5%
Other	89.8%

Build Automation

Featured Reviews

Bharadwaj Deepak Mohapatra

DevOps Engineer at ENTERPRISE SYSTEM SOLUTIONS LIMITED

Has supported repository management and demonstrates potential in workflow flexibility

While GitHub Actions offers a range of functionalities, it is newer compared to more established tools such as Jenkins and Azure DevOps. There is still room for improvement, especially in areas concerning deeper capabilities akin to those provided by Jenkins and Azure DevOps. Given the evolving nature of technology, there are potential improvements GitHub Actions can focus on, including enhancing support and reliability to match its competitors.

Read full review

Josh Call

Software Engineer at a computer software company with 201-500 employees

Enhances productivity with efficient dependency handling and a straightforward setup

GNU Make is used as a build system tool. Most people don't use GNU Make directly but utilize other systems like CMake to generate Make files, which are then run by GNU Make. This is common for tasks like compiling C++ code. In the industry, AI developers, for example, use GNU Make in their work…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"GitHub Actions provides workflows that allow for process automation, enabling operations such as build, deploy, and scale applications."

"I have optimized job execution time by running test scripts in parallel and creating multiple pipelines; we've significantly reduced execution times. What could take 50 minutes can be cut down to just 8 to 10 minutes through these optimizations."

"It is easy to use, especially if you are accustomed to using GitHub."

"The solution has saved us approximately 20% in terms of efficiency and productivity."

"It improves efficiency as it involves no downtime and is managed by GitHub."

"Creating workflows in YAML format is straightforward and easy to comprehend. This includes both understanding and writing workflows. Additionally, the downloading aspect for third-party instances can also be easily done. It's worth noting that vulnerability analysis and similar tasks should be part of our automation through data workflows. Furthermore, we can break down our processes step by step, starting from building, then moving on to analysis, testing, and finally deploying in production and the clear environment. All of these tasks can be efficiently managed within this platform."

"GitHub Actions can be easily configured, especially for environment variables and secrets. The UI is understandable and user-friendly for setting up CI/CD pipelines. I prefer tools like GitLab, where the pipeline starts quickly and is accessible near the commits for easy access. However, many CI/CD tools are interchangeable due to similar features of GitHub Actions and other similar tools."

"GitHub Actions helps automate the deployment process, eliminating manual copying and testing, which saves time and minimizes errors."

More GitHub Actions pros

"Makefiles are extremely easy to work with using any preferred editor. GNU Make can be run directly from the terminal, not requiring any time wasted on clicking."

"Full-featured syntax allows building strategies as simple or as complex as one wishes, and declarative approach fits the task really well. Wide adoption also means that everybody knows what GNU Make is and how to use it."

"I have not encountered any scalability issues with GNU Make. It is as scalable as the project's structure is, and then some."

"Setup is extremely straightforward."

"The initial setup of GNU Make is straightforward."

"GNU Make is such an essential tool that it is almost impossible to imagine working without it. Not having it, developers would probably have to resort to doing everything manually or via shell scripts."

Cons

"GitHub Actions lacks a feature for automating the build process for mobile applications."

"Improvements could be made in terms of time-saving capabilities and resolving potential complexities in centralized workflows."

"The only issue I have faced is with authorization, particularly when configuring the GitHub token correctly."

"The minor drawback of GitHub Actions is the management of the dashboard and pipeline runs, which needs improvement. The dashboard for running pipelines could be better."

"The primary area for improvement I see is in artifact management, especially for saving screenshots or videos from failed tests or data-driven actions. Currently, the configuration for saving these artifacts is complex."

"We still use Jenkins for some tasks, which suggests there may be areas for improvement in GitHub Actions."

"In our company, procedures or rules need to be completed, which is not a problem with GitHub Actions but with our process."

"GitHub sometimes makes it difficult to debug actions."

More GitHub Actions cons

"GNU Make does not provide traditional customer support."

"GNU Make requires using the Tab symbol as the first symbol of command line for execution. In some text editors this can be problematic, as they automatically insert spaces instead of tabs."

"Vanilla GNU Make does not support any kind of colored output. A wrapper named colormake exists to work around this, but native (opt-in) support would be welcome."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's low-priced. Not high, but definitely low."

"Price-wise, GitHub Actions is okay. If I want to use the product's advanced features, then I need to pay the licensing charges for the solution."

"It is free and open platform, so I would rate it 1 out of 10."

"Regarding cost, as an enterprise, we negotiate our license and expenses, so I can't provide a specific rating for that."

"The tool's price is okay and reasonable."

"For our basic usage, we didn't have to pay."

"The product is slightly more expensive than some alternatives."

"The cost for GitHub Actions may be around $45 dollars per user."

"There is no price for this product. No licensing. It’s open-source."

"GNU Make is free and open source software."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Build Automation solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

Comms Service Provider

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	11

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GitHub Actions?

I have optimized job execution time by running test scripts in parallel and creating multiple pipelines; we've significantly reduced execution times. What could take 50 minutes can be cut down to j...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitHub Actions?

I would rate pricing a seven, which leans toward the expensive side. However, there is still value for money, and that's why we continue using it.

See all answers

What needs improvement with GitHub Actions?

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GNU Make?

GNU Make is a free solution that comes with Linux, which positively impacts operational costs by eliminating licensing fees.

See all answers

What needs improvement with GNU Make?

I am not familiar enough with it to suggest any specific new features or areas for improvement. It occupies its niche well.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for GNU Make?

See all answers

Comparisons

Tekton vs GitHub Actions

Compared 22% of the time

Harness vs GitHub Actions

Compared 13% of the time

TeamCity vs GitHub Actions

Compared 8% of the time

Bamboo vs GitHub Actions

Compared 8% of the time

Buildkite vs GitHub Actions

Compared 7% of the time

More GitHub Actions Competitors

Jenkins vs GNU Make

Compared 41% of the time

Bazel vs GNU Make

Compared 23% of the time

CloudBees vs GNU Make

Compared 19% of the time

TeamCity vs GNU Make

Compared 17% of the time

More GNU Make Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

GitHub Actions

January 2026

Download GitHub Actions product report

Buyer's Guide

Build Automation

January 2026

Download GNU Make product report

Overview

GitHub Actions streamlines CI/CD processes with an intuitive YAML workflow and robust automation, enhancing efficiency and integration with third-party tools and cloud providers.

GitHub Actions automates development pipelines, supports scalable public and private runners, and manages secure secrets. This tool integrates seamlessly with platforms like AWS, Kubernetes, Google Cloud, and Databricks. It enhances DevOps workflows with reliable task automation. Users note areas for UI and deployment tool improvements, artifact management simplification, and additional programming language support. Debugging complexity and hosting agent transitions pose challenges, along with integration enhancements for tools like OneDrive.

What are GitHub Actions' key features?

YAML Workflow Creation: Simplifies configuration with intuitive YAML.
CI/CD Integration: Provides seamless integration within DevOps pipelines.
Automation Capabilities: Automates tasks with minimal manual intervention.
Third-Party Tool Compatibility: Works well with diverse tools and platforms.
Secure Secrets Management: Protects sensitive information effectively.

What benefits do users find in GitHub Actions?

Enhanced Performance: Boosts task execution speed and reliability.
Scalability: Supports growth with flexible runner options.
Improved Release Cycles: Ensures consistent updates and deployments.
Workflow Efficiency: Reduces manual tasks, increasing operational efficiency.

Companies in tech and software development frequently utilize GitHub Actions for integrating, deploying, and versioning projects. It is often employed for deploying applications to cloud environments like AWS and Kubernetes, managing extensive CI/CD workflows, and automating test and security operations, thereby streamlining production cycles across industries.

GitHub

Make is a tool which controls the generation of executables and other non-source files of a program from the program's source files.

GNU

Buyer's Guide

GNU Make vs. GitHub Actions

December 2025

Free Report: GNU Make vs. GitHub Actions

Find out what your peers are saying about GNU Make vs. GitHub Actions and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our GNU Make vs. GitHub Actions report.

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.