Matthias Kilian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Just beeing curious: did anyone ever think about using cmake?
I've been using CMake at work. We have just switched to using autotools (and a python script to generate .am files). It has all the drawbacks of autotools, plus: not very portable, yet another macro language, configure-time file globbing, broken out-of-tree build, clumsy overriding of compiler, flags, etc (CC=, CXX=), no standard targets (all, clean, install), built-in rules that cannot be cancelled, no cross-build support, autodetection of installed libraries by guessing and probing common locations (in /, which makes cross compiling next to impossible), no make-time overriding of variables/flags (make CFLAGS=.., make DESTDIR=..), full expansion of all variables and targets in all expanded makefiles, one make directory expands to 4 generated make files, ... It is quite fast, (almost as fast as stepmake), though. Jan. -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien | http://www.lilypond.org _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
