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
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 at 16:12, Regina Obe wrote:
> I think we should drop Nmake.
It's worth mentioning that PROJ version 6 is planning to drop NMAKE:
https://github.com/OSGeo/proj.4/pull/1137
___
geos-devel mailing list
geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org
I think we should drop Nmake.
+1
Does anyone have issues with that if we drop in 3.8?
I think Cmake is superior in every way for windows building.
Thanks,
Regna
___
geos-devel mailing list
geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org
From: geos-devel [mailto:geos-devel-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Vicky
Vergara
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2018 5:15 PM
To: GEOS Development List
Subject: Re: [geos-devel] RFC7 - Use CMake as build system for GEOS
My conclusion is:
- Supporting autotools and Nmake and
> 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
pkgsrc is using autoconf. I have had far more problems with cmake over
time than with autoconf.
This is obviously an issue where people disagree.
However, two observations where there is probably common ground:
I don't understand windows native builds (because I don't use
windows), but I
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 2:44 PM Regina Obe wrote:
> >
> > The current situation is really that CMake is a contributed module and
> the
> > official build tool _is_ autotools. The problem reported in that
> > RFC7 is not well-posed in that it assumes contributors are _required_ to
> > support
>
> The current situation is really that CMake is a contributed module and the
> official build tool _is_ autotools. The problem reported in that
> RFC7 is not well-posed in that it assumes contributors are _required_ to
> support multiple build systems.
> Truth is they only need to support
On 2018-10-03 4:20 PM, Sandro Santilli wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 02:14:32PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
Sandro Santilli writes:
On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 12:38:50PM -0400, Daniel Baston wrote:
https://trac.osgeo.org/geos/wiki/RFC7
One of the reasons why I still prefer autotools is its
On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 02:14:32PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> Sandro Santilli writes:
> > On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 12:38:50PM -0400, Daniel Baston wrote:
> >>
> >> https://trac.osgeo.org/geos/wiki/RFC7
> >
> > One of the reasons why I still prefer autotools is its ability
> > to build tester
> One of the reasons why I still prefer autotools is its ability
> to build tester scripts which work before install (via libtool).
> Does cmake allow for that ?
Are you asking whether the GEOS test suite can be run against
a non-installed copy of the library (yes), or are you referring to
other
Sandro Santilli writes:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 12:38:50PM -0400, Daniel Baston wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I've posted an RFC to switch to CMake as the exclusive build system for
>> GEOS. Some reasoning is in the RFC itself, but it boils down to wasted
>> developer and machine effort supporting
On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 12:38:50PM -0400, Daniel Baston wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I've posted an RFC to switch to CMake as the exclusive build system for
> GEOS. Some reasoning is in the RFC itself, but it boils down to wasted
> developer and machine effort supporting the combination of autotools,
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
