On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 1:08 PM, bjoern michaelsen - Sun Microsystems - Hamburg Germany <bjoern.michael...@sun.com> wrote:
>> Firstly under dependencies it says "[CMake] is not usually available >> on the default install of many platforms." and then a bit further down >> "One might consider using Python as a tool for _all_ non-standard >> build tasks. Python is easy to distribute and install on all >> platforms." This is somewhat conflicting: CMake is just as available >> and easy to install as Python on every (meaningful) platform. > > Did you miss the line "However, it is also a very fat dependency and > thus it is questionable, if it would be worth the effort just to > get rid of cygwin (or another Unix environment on windows)." just > following the sentence? ;) No I did not, but despite that it somewhat harsh to imply that CMake is hard to get or install. Getting it is roughly as hard as getting a compiler (buying full registered versions of MSVC notwithstanding). > As for the toolset the following combinations are thinkable: > GNU make + Unix Tools (sh, awk, sed ... - cygwin on windows) > GNU make + Python (native on windows/unix) > CMake + Unix Tools (sh, awk, sed ... - cygwin on windows) > CMake + Python (native on windows/unix) > CMake + custom tools (written in C/C++) There is also "Pure CMake". But as I said earlier, it is probably smarter to first go "CMake + Unix" and then transition to pure CMake. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tools.openoffice.org
