Re: [Chicken-users] ${DISTFILES}

[Brandon J. Van Every]

felix winkelmann wrote: On 3/28/06, Brandon J. Van Every <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How will this relate to CMake builds, strategically speaking? I don't like the idea of toughing it out on CMake if your own work eclipses it. I would note that although a scheme-based build system has inherent advantages, CMake is a proven cross-platform tool with an external support team. CMake will in time be useful for getting Chicken onto new platforms. I don't deny that, but currently cmake isn't up to it (at least not the current release). CMake 2.2 lacks some important features.  CMake 2.3, the development version under CVS, has solved all of my build problems so far.  The main limitation is learning how to convert all that autoconf crap to CMake, and to refactor the bootstrap.  Right now I only have so much available time.  CMake is up to it; the problem is the learning curve.  I just think at the end of it all, CMake will be easier to learn, maintain, and more robust than Autoconf. Cheers, Brandon Van Every

_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users