On Oct 1, 2006, at 20:54, Nikolaus Waxweiler wrote:
What I miss about your proposal is outlining actual problems
GNUstep has and which would be solved by using cmake (and how).
CMake was just the next best example I had ("[...] or better:
Moving Away From GNUstep Make") and there's also gsjam, but as
said, I still have to look into that. The general idea was, as
stated, to outsource as much work as possible to be able to
concentrate on -base, -gui and -back, I then just listed what CMake
can do. Others already stated that a switch right now to *any*
other build system would be more work than it's worth, and well,
I'll just continue tinkering and see what comes up :)
Exactly. But even there is little reason to "outsource" gnustep-make
work because its already done and needs little maintenance. And cmake
etc doesn't help us with ObjC/GNUstep specific things like PCH
support either ;-)
Nah, CMake is a cross-platform reinvention of Autotools :P. GS-M is
a reinvention insofar that it's a complete build system.
I honestly don't get it, _re_invention of what? :-) It just a set of
utilities which can be used with make. Its still plain old (GNU...)
make.
I would be interested to see how a typical GNUstep make package
would look like in cmake.
Do you mean a GNUmakefile? In the ideal/simplest case, a
CMakeLists.txt for an application would look like
FIND_PACKAGE(GNUstep REQUIRED)
ADD_EXECUTABLE(SomeApp GNUSTEP_BUNDLE source1.m source2.c
source3.mm)
or maybe
FIND_PACKAGE(GNUstep REQUIRED)
GNUSTEP_APP(SomeApp source1.m source2.c source3.mm)
I'll see.
Yup.
Greets,
Helge
--
Helge Hess
http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/helge/
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnustep mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
