Now thats a very bad position to advocate for anything. Really. What
about first learning CMake and then showing a prototype on how things
work and would look like? :-)
That would be a much better basis to bring up such a proposal.
Shame on me, yes, but I'm tinkering with it every now and then.
What I miss about your proposal is outlining actual problems GNUstep has
and which would be solved by using cmake (and how).
CMake was just the next best example I had ("[...] or better: Moving Away
From GNUstep Make") and there's also gsjam, but as said, I still have to
look into that. The general idea was, as stated, to outsource as much work
as possible to be able to concentrate on -base, -gui and -back, I then
just listed what CMake can do. Others already stated that a switch right
now to *any* other build system would be more work than it's worth, and
well, I'll just continue tinkering and see what comes up :)
What I like about GNUstep make is that its _not_ a reinvention of the
wheel but a very clever use of the existing stuff. In fact you could
possibly say that CMake is a reinvention of gstep-make? Probably around
much longer ;-)
Nah, CMake is a cross-platform reinvention of Autotools :P. GS-M is a
reinvention insofar that it's a complete build system.
I would be interested to see how a typical GNUstep make package would
look like in cmake.
Do you mean a GNUmakefile? In the ideal/simplest case, a CMakeLists.txt
for an application would look like
FIND_PACKAGE(GNUstep REQUIRED)
ADD_EXECUTABLE(SomeApp GNUSTEP_BUNDLE source1.m source2.c source3.mm)
or maybe
FIND_PACKAGE(GNUstep REQUIRED)
GNUSTEP_APP(SomeApp source1.m source2.c source3.mm)
I'll see.
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnustep mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
