On Sunday 05 Nov 2006 22:24, Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas wrote:
> You need at least CMake 2.4 for KDE support.

Hm, that's a bit of a worry.  I wonder whether you can easily get that across 
distributions at the moment?  What's the situation like for e.g. Fedora 
users?

I run several machines based on Debian stable myself, and that only has 2.0.5.  
For optional libraries I don't care so much, but I don't want people having 
to faff about building something else before they can even try to run the 
Rosegarden configure stage.  Come to that, I'm not so keen on having to build 
the thing myself before I can test it out.

I think we need to approach this with some care.  We seem to have become very 
keen to switch from scons just on the basis that KDE is doing so -- it's not 
quite clear to me what exactly is wrong with it for us.  I'm not fond of 
scons myself, but that's really down to my aversion to Python; I can't say I 
regularly notice actual problems with it.  What are they?  Are they problems 
in scons, or in our scripts?

I haven't tried the cmake build yet, but two things about it look good -- the 
simple configuration files, and the fact that it builds to Makefiles.  If the 
Makefiles turn out to be simpler than those from autoconf, then all the 
better.

I am seriously considering trying a competing build system based on autoconf.  
No automake or libtool, just a relatively simple configure stage with a 
single hand-built Makefile.in, probably working by building all files using 
wildcards, as reorganise-makefile does, instead of listing the sources.  We 
don't need to build any interim libraries, and GNU make is really good at 
handling shell callouts and wildcards.  Hey, we could even use makedepend.  
But you can pretty much guarantee I won't get around to it.

One reason I'm tempted is that I think the biggest problem with all our build 
systems to date has been an over-reliance on the inclusion of "magic scripts 
from KDE".  These invariably seem to be hideously complicated things that are 
designed to do all the work for building KDE component libraries, but that 
for us are overengineered and fragile.  The suggestion that we need to use a 
newer version of cmake than I have available, so that we can use functions 
with names like KDE3_ADD_DCOP_SKELS, is giving me that same feeling again.  
Building DCOP stuff is really not hard -- it's like half a dozen lines in 
reorganise-makefile.  It's more that the existence of all these complicated 
macros that do it gives us the feeling that it must be hard, so we never 
bother to learn what it actually involves.


Chris

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Rosegarden-devel mailing list
[email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel

Reply via email to