On 27 Apr 2018, at 8:55, Robin Sommer wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 16:54 -0500, you wrote: > >> (1) Users whose OS has insufficient CMake will need to compile/obtain >> a newer one. > >> (2) We go back to CMake 2.8.12 and have people compile CAF >> themselves. >> (Or maybe we could conditionally require only 2.8.12 users to compile >> CAF and others get the embedded CAF). > >> (3) I need to try to hack our CMake system more to try to get back >> down >> to 2.8.12 while still being able to embed CAF. > > If there's something quick that ends up making (3) work, that'd be > ideal of course, but I don't think it's worth spending much time on, > given that there are reasonable ways to get a more recent cmake. > > I wouldn't want to go back to not shipping CAF at all, but if we can > tell cmake that 2.8.12 is fine if users build CAF themselves, that > would be the 2nd best option I think. (1) ist worst case, which still > isn't too bad IMO, unless it does actually prevent us from building > binary packages for RH, that would be a problem. > Yup, 2 would be ok I guess. One should still be able to just compile the CAF in the Bro subdirectory in that case, right? 1 I would rather avoid if possible. Johanna _______________________________________________ bro-dev mailing list bro-dev@bro.org http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev
