Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebas...@xs4all.nl> writes: > On 10/4/18 4:39 AM, Regina Obe wrote: >>> pkgsrc is using autoconf. I have had far more problems with cmake over >>> time than with autoconf. >>> >> >> But you do use CMake for some things right? >> >> I presume Debian and CentOS packagers already use CMake because they ship >> pgRouting and pgRouting only supports CMake. >> Does CGAL support autotools? I've never tried since I always went for the >> CMake. > > Debian packaging tools also support CMake.
pkgsrc does too. Basically it is well more than prevalent enough that packaging systems esentially have to. > For the geos package autotools is used because that's the official > buildsystem and on Linux superior to CMake. E.g. libtool does the right > thing with library versioning. I have never tried geos cmake, but my broad experience over the years is that autotools-based systems almost entirely work correctly and cmake-based systems are more troubled. > I would prefer if geos kept autotools as the default buildsystem for > Linux, using CMake for Windows and other systems is fine with me. Seconded, except I would say default on "systems conforming to POSIX" rather than just Linux. >> When I was packaging 3.7.0 I spent 20% of my time cursing because >> there was this autotools configure thing, CMake make lists, and I >> think even NMake or some such thing >> That all needed changing just to get a stupid version number in place. Do you mean changing one number in one line in configure.ac, and one line in some cmake file? >> The problem with that thinking is that it HAS HAD low rate of building >> system changes >> This I'm pretty sure will change in 3.8. Both Dan and Vicky have huge plans >> for improving GEOS >> Which means we are going to have to add a ton more tests to the GEOS suite >> to ensure we don't break things. >> >> This will become very time consuming if we have to test against autotools >> and CMake. It seems that the downside of two is adding each test file in two places, and this seems tiny compared to writing and testing a test file. >> I'm not sure if it's true for other people, or if it's just because I'm >> working on a Handicapped platform >> But for me even when autotools WAS working GEOS compiled way faster under >> CMake than it did under autotools. Try compiling cmake too. On some systems I test on it takes hours to build cmake. >> If that is true for others, those cycles make a big difference for >> development. If you have just changed source files and rebuild, you just run make. If you are doing a full regression test, then it does more. _______________________________________________ geos-devel mailing list geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
