On Saturday 21 April 2007 09:37, C. Bergström wrote: > Mike Williams wrote: > > If we have to move away from the makefiles (which have always worked > > quite well for me), then my vote is definitely for CMake.
I would prefer cmake too. Have gone to the autotools-hell quite a few times.. > cmake is cleaner and arguably 'better', but > > 1) autoconf is a defacto standard > 2) I can hack autofoo, but I'm not sure how many developers are > interested in learning another set of make tools. I can hack autotools too, but i'm far away beeing an expert in it. Cmake is really easy to start with, no need for all these macros, shell scripts and all these other stuff. > 3) cmake doesn't compile on hardened linux for various reasons which > it's not to blame Could you post any evidence for this claim? For example KDE uses cmake, and i don't think they would accept such a problem. > 4) poses yet another build dependency > If it isn't broke why fix it? Autotool is in my opionion broken. :-) But why we could not stay with the current Makefiles? They work fairly well, and it is really easy to make modifikations. Cheers, Henning _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
