Benjamin Kirk writes: > >> Switching is only one half of the problem, ther other part is > >> maintenance. So, *assuming* that the the transition could be somehow > >> done, would the developers be eager to maintain it? > > > > Speaking just for myself, "No", but that's okay because I'm not eager > > to maintain the autoconf system either - I try to only add new > > configure-time options or new dependencies when it's really necessary. > > I think the people who deal with our build system the most are Ben and > > Ondrej; I'd have no objections to changes if they didn't. > > My only experience with cmake was back in 2002 when I unpacked VTK and > became instantly irritated that I had to install an additional package to > even attempt building it. Although, judging by the headlines > (http://lwn.net/Articles/188693) I'm guessing preinstalled cmake > installations will become more commonplace.
It may, but we still don't have it installed by default in the CFDLab, and we have a fair number (1589) of RPMs on the workstations these days. It also isn't installed at our friendly neighborhood supercomputing center... that would make it a definite "no-go" for me. -J ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Libmesh-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
