It's not a question of majority - a majority now provide a cmake option. It is a question of dependency, PCRE must be built, PCRE must be configured with cmake, cmake is a mandatory tool for configuring httpd on windows, irrespective of how many times it must be invoked. brotli is a new nice-to-have and offers three different build solutions.
If invoked for httpd, the resulting *build* may be Microsoft Solution Files, Microsoft MSBuild Files, Microsoft NMake files and even others. It can emit .dsp files, not that anyone would want that today :) So arguing that utilizing cmake 'removes the studio files' misses the point. They aren't lost, they are easily created without the hassles of cvtdsp.pl and in a manner that can be maintained and tested by even the Unix-only contributors. On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Steffen <i...@apachelounge.com> wrote: > Accurate: I only/must use cmake with pcre and brotli, rest/most is make. > No cmake *majority*. > >> Op 28 apr. 2017 om 18:45 heeft William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> het >> volgende geschreven: >> >>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Jan Ehrhardt <php...@ehrhardt.nl> wrote: >>> William A Rowe Jr in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Fri, 28 Apr 2017 10:30:03 >>> -0500): >>>> You might have missed my thought here... suggesting that the CMake >>>> not-so-experimental build become recommended for users who want to >>>> build all the modules in one go including the new mod_brotli. >>> >>> People like Steffen, Gregg and me disagree with you on making CMake the >>> only way for building Apache and all the modules in one go. >> >> And until brotli (topic of current discussion) it was convenient to hide >> behind >> the fact that CMake wasn't necessary. Now that the *majority* of httpd >> project >> dependencies must all be configured using cmake (and build with one of a >> number of actual toolchains, including your favored Visual Studio GUI view, >> msbuild, nmake makefiles, even eclipse etc etc etc.) the most compelling >> reason to ship .mak + .dsp has now evaporated. >> >> I will never invoke devenv.exe "target" from the CMake output, I like the >> simpler forms better, but I'm happy to help diagnose anything that CMake >> is doing wrong in emitting the vcproj or makefile output for your >> consumption. >> >> The lack of understanding of why these libs exist in the .mak and not in the >> .dep files Gregg updated illustrates that the old .dsp files are no longer of >> any substantive value. As I mentioned earlier, I haven't used the .dsw or >> these resulting .mak files in a decade because my httpd.exe+++ build all >> seeks an installed tree expat/pcre/apr/openssl/libxml2/zlib (ultimately, the >> final install prefix for httpd), and I can fix everything by munging INCLUDE >> and LIB envvars vs. a nightmare of unpacking sources into directories of >> different names than their source distribution, keeping up with build tree >> restructuring by the maintainers, or munging .dsp/.mak files. >
