Hi Jeff,
Message 1 of ?
On 8/30/2013 5:25 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Please let me know if you
* are waiting for some certain feature (other than near perfection)
before you use it
* attempt to use it but are slowed down by tool requirements or bad
documentation or anything else
* attempt to use it but it fails so badly that you leave it in disgust
with no desire to report or try to fix anything
* try it and it works for you (what cmake backend, what other build
characteristics)
* etc.
Well, putting on my Apache Haus hat my first impressions are "What a
nightmare!" :)
I must say I prefer the more turnkey approach we enjoy these days, that
said;
I tried this via command line, not the GUI. First creating a batch file
took quite a bit of the pain out of it. For me, long command lines leave
a lot of room for typos.
Problems run into;
WARNING: Target "mod_proxy_html" requests linking to directory
"C:/buildc/libxml2/win32/bin.msvc".
Targets may link only to libraries. CMake is dropping the item.
WARNING: Target "mod_xml2enc" requests linking to directory
"C:/buildc/libxml2/win32/bin.msvc". Tar
gets may link only to libraries. CMake is dropping the item.
Having to list actual library files is ok for me, but a noob probably
doesn't know just what lib/s your looking for. MSVC linker has
/LIBPATH:<path> where if anything, only the directory would need to be
listed as long as the needed libraies are listed in $(LIBS). What is
worse here is I see this in the beginningISH;
-- Found LibXml2: C:/buildc/libxml2/win32/bin.msvc
so no it really didn't!
Then:
-- Could NOT find OpenSSL (missing: OPENSSL_LIBRARIES OPENSSL_INCLUDE_DIR)
-- mod_deflate was requested but couldn't be built due to a missing
prerequisite (ZLIB_FOUND)
-- mod_ssl was requested but couldn't be built due to a missing
prerequisite (OPENSSL_FOUND)
Again, basically same complaint as above. If we only need to give an
whathaveyou_include_dir, why not a whathaveyou_lib_dir?
Some comments I have received off list by folks who will remain unnamed;
1. When I see the readme, there are quite some restrictions. Not sure
yet if that hurts us much.
2. I foresee more maintenance/support/issues with cmake, I see it with
other products using it. It introduces an other dependency.
3. Just wondering what is the drive to go the cmake way, I see no that
issues with the current way.
4. Just puzzling with cmake. Do not know how to start.
My personal comments;
PCRE requires CMake, so the one more required tool I see as moot.
This process seems to add a lot of time spent to the build time. This
process seems much more complex and noobs will probably be bald from
pulling out their hair by the time they figure it out.
On Windows we build all but /extra modules (BuildBin vs. BuildAll with
the GUI route), would like to see that remain.
On Windows we have a good default config loading just what is needed,
would like to see that remain.
Why not just look for dependencies where you would find them today
(source_root\srclib)? We know where everything should be already and
would really save all the -DTHISnTHAT_INCLUDE/LIB_DIR business. Yes, I
understand (and one thing I do not like) is that cmake copies & creates
files into a different directory, with hard coded pointers to
everything, but I do not see why we should need more that installdir &
srcdir. Optional sure, having to use those every time, no! I think
src_dir/srclib would be a better default location than what is there
now. One thing if you have to set all these in the GUI, that alone could
take someone an hour if the have to browse to everything (I'd copy/paste
paths from Explorer personally).
I've never actually "nmake install" any dependency, it's rather useless
on Windows. I have to create multiple mod_ssl with different openssl
versions so installing openssl would limit that. This might help you
understand my suggestion about dependencies :)
Obviously I have not built the binaries yet. I need to put it down for
awhile now but will try more this weekend.
Cheerio and happy Labor Day,
Gregg
