On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> wrote:
> Daniel Schepler wrote:
>
>> Some projects use cmake rather than make. The principle is the same, but
>> cmake is powerful enough that the “configure” step is not needed. See the
>> project’s documentation for instructions on how to build.
>>
>> That seems a bit misleading - I'd rather say that running cmake does the
>> "configure" step and then make does the "build" step.
>>
>
> No it doesn't. You still need to run make.
>
> Note that LFS does not have any packages that use cmake, but BLFS does.
Yes, that's what I was trying to say. I guess I forgot to mark that the
paragraph starting "Some projects use cmake..." is a quote from the web
page - sorry about that.
By the way, the cmake command in my example should actually have been:
"cmake . -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release {some options}" (forgot the . as source
directory).
Also, for a general audience, I personally would want to encourage people
to use separate build directories when possible (though LFS/BLFS don't tend
to do that except when it's necessary or recommended by the upstream build
instructions). So maybe, make the examples:
# unpack and read documentation
tar xf filename
cd {directory created by above step}
less README
less INSTALL
# generate customised makefile
./configure {some options}
# compile everything in the local directory
make
# update global directories
sudo make install
# unpack and read documentation
tar xf filename
cd {directory created by above step}
less README
less INSTALL
# generate customised makefile
./configure {some options}
# compile everything in the local directory
make
# update global directories
sudo make install
--
Daniel Schepler
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
