On Thursday 10 December 2009 03:25:25 Jose Fonseca wrote: > I agree you're free to choose whatever build system you'd like if it's > going to be in a separate repos. > > I've used CMake many times and it is a very nice build system indeed. It's > also very convenient to use on windows (it can generate Visual Studio > files), and recently they made very easy to cross-compile linux->windows. > > The problem I had when I tried to convert Mesa to CMake was that it didn't > support convenience libraries -- a static library which contains -fPIC > objects. All mesa/gallium auxiliary libraries are like that since the > final target is a shared object, and it there was no way to extend CMake > to do that at that time [1]. Has this changed recently, or is this not > relevant for a OpenCL statetracker?
A bit of both :) The state tracker itself won't be producing convenience libraries, it's really just a single library so it should be fine either way. And the solution that the CMake folks seem to be advocating (splitting sources into separate CMakeLists.txt files: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ#Does_CMake_support_.22convenience.22_libraries.3F ) is imho a reasonable one. And yea, I really like that CMake can produce native build files on all platforms (Makefiles on linux, Visual Studio on Windows, XCode build files on osx...) and that it has self-contained installers for all platforms, it's very neat. z ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Return on Information: Google Enterprise Search pays you back Get the facts. http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Mesa3d-dev mailing list Mesa3d-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-dev
