On Jul 19, 2015 4:40 PM, "Bruce Dubbs" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Ken Moffat wrote:
>
>> Weird.  What I find weirder is the 'nix developers who prefer cmake.
>
>
> A couple of differences that may drive preferences:
>
> autoconf/automake are basically m4 based systems.  The syntax is a bit
weird, but its been around for a long time.
>
> cmake uses a c-type syntax which is reasonably easy to read.
>
> auto* uses configure.ac -> configure
> configure is a shell script that can be read/modified, but not easily. It
uses Makefile.in to generate a Makefile.
>
> cmake is a one step program to generate a Makefile.
>
> To a great extent, I think it is a matter of what you are used to using.
For smaller projects, it probably doesn't make any difference.  For larger
ones, I don't think there is any good solution.
>
>   -- Bruce
>
> Note: I used to work with Qt and they use qmake.  Actually, I found that
to be relatively easy to both read and write. However it is Qt specific and
we didn't need to check a system for available tools.

Thank you for the education on this matter. I have not really looked into
build systems, all I know is how to use them to configure the build of
software.

Based on what I have used, I don't have a prererence.

Douglas R. Reno
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to