Ok i will try to find time to finish configuration part of CMakeLists.txt and add other target as well.
Typed with thumbs. On Jul 20, 2017 2:57 PM, "Evgeny Grin" <k...@yandex.ru> wrote: On 20.07.2017 10:22, Štefan Bellus wrote: > Sorry That I do no reply on mails, but I did not received any even if I > am subscribed. > I only noticed your reply in archive. Try to check "spam". >> By using CMake we could get rid of MSVC projects, but maintaining > CMake is way harder then MSVC project in current state > > Yes. The benefit will be achieved only if you use only CMake. No > autotools, MSVC projects. > I convert the autotools to CMake to check if possible to replace it with > CMake. > I found out that it is possible. It take me 2 days to convert it. But it > not waste of time. I learn how to configure sources in CMake and I learn > also how autotools configure sources. I suggest you to put your result to some public repo. May be others will find your CMake setup useful. >> What about meson? > > It is cool. The syntax is nice. They keep the idea of describing the > build in general language and > let the back-end (CMake or meson) to generate specific commands for > underlying build systems. > The syntax of this general language is much better in meson. > I votes for meson :) > I am little bit skeptic because more and more people start to use CMake > nowadays. But meson is written in python and a lot of more people can > use python as C/CPP (CMake is written in C/CPP) and contribute to meson. > I guess if meson also introduce some package manager for C (something > like Java maven repositories or C# Nuget) they will win. > > I am a maintainer of project that depends on your library. I would love > if you can provide same build system on all platforms. It really make > thinks easier. As I said, you can try to maintain your CMake configuration. If there will be mass demand for CMake, we could come back to this question. -- Best Wishes, Evgeny Grin