Nick Mathewson wrote: [...] > Yeah; I may have acted too dismissively to cmake initially. I think > it would be a mistake to _replace_ our autotools stuff with cmake in a > 2.0.x timeframe, but if cmake is the best way to produce project files > that make VS people happy, I'd be fine using cmake for that. > > [...] >> If you are more comfortable with make, why not just use nmake? Its not >> as if this is a >> very complex project structure. > > Sure, nmake would be fine too. I'd love to include a good nmake file > if anybody writes one.
For my work on MySQL Proxy (which uses libevent, sure) I use both: * autotools for all the unixes * cmake for windows It is sometimes a pain as they are not always in sync, but both systems have their unique features and are important, like autotools "make distcheck" feature which does everything to verify that a build is good. I usually use cmake for the development phase (it is faster to build with cmake) and use automake and friends for the packaging and distribution. cheers, Jan -- jan: "Gee, Brain^WEric, what'd you wanna do tonight?" eric: Same thing we do everynight: Take over the HelloWorld! _______________________________________________ Libevent-users mailing list Libevent-users@monkey.org http://monkeymail.org/mailman/listinfo/libevent-users
