On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri <barbi...@profusion.mobi> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Vincent Torri <vincent.to...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri >> <barbi...@profusion.mobi> wrote: >>>> >>>> I would actually like you to answer that question: why moving to cmake >>>> if the autotools are already doing the job correctly ? >>> >>> Doing it correctly may not be enough. >> >> you didn't answer to that question. you just give vague comparison. So >> what's no enough ? > > 1. it is utterly complicated for what it does, m4 macros are a hell, > the shell commands to be portable must be restricted from gnu-isms and > likely we fail at that from time to time.
it's a hell for you, maybe. I've tried to twek cmake files, and i didn't undrestand how to do what i wanted. It's a matter of learning a langage. > 2. it does not generate native build systems, which is not a problem > for the way we handle win32/mac ports at the moment, but it may not be > sufficient in the future. for win32, i've already replied. > 3. it does not help with generation of your windows packages, cmake > generates it and other helpers for the unpackaged distributions (rpm > at least). see 2. > 4. it is hard to maintain (see #1). not for me > 5. it is hard to customize and extend (see #1) not for me again, it's a matter of learning a "langage". Vincent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Systems Optimization Self Assessment Improve efficiency and utilization of IT resources. Drive out cost and improve service delivery. Take 5 minutes to use this Systems Optimization Self Assessment. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sdnl/114/51450054/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
