On 3/8/11 6:06 AM, Pierre Ossman wrote: > Well, we've tried the dual build system approach in the past and it > didn't really work. As far as I'm concerned we have two options on the > table; going on ahead with using CMake for everything and dealing with > the fallout, or scrapping CMake and going back to autotools.
The dual build system works fine in my mind. It was only Cendio that ever objected to it, and it seemed to be largely on philosophical grounds. We haven't eliminated autotools. We still have to use it to build the X server, and we always will. However, I'm not going to argue anymore about this, because that also takes up time that I don't have. I can't break away from paying work right now to go and dedicate another 30 or 40 hours to testing and tweaking the build tools, particularly given that someone will probably break them again long before 1.2, requiring a re-test. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d _______________________________________________ Tigervnc-devel mailing list Tigervnc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tigervnc-devel
