I didn't say that SCons didn't work great on Windows. I just said that
it was my impression that CMake was more "Windows-friendly." By that, I
mean it has full support for generating IDE projects and doesn't require
external dependencies like Python, etc. I thought the link from the
SCons wiki w
I am not sure on the visualization stuff or what you mean by it
exactly. KDE moved to SCons initially and then to CMake because they
wanted custom changes and we not getting results as fast as they liked.
I haven't seen anything that would require a custom change in SCons
myself. It does w
On 9/20/10 3:42 AM, Adam Tkac wrote:
> Which version of autoconf are you using?
The version that ships with RHEL 4 (2.59).
The attached patch seems to make things work properly. Question for
Martin: Is the "while(0)" really necessary? I don't understand why the
macro can't just be:
#define gn
I've looked at SCons cursorily. The original reason why I started
looking at CMake was that I'm a visualization guy, and CMake has a lot
of traction in that community (that's where it came from originally.)
More generally, however, my (perhaps incorrect) impression is that there
seem to be more pr
I would be glad to see a better cross platform build system. I have
done some work with CMake in the past and with SCons. I found Scons to
be a better system overall. One of the big selling points of it for me
was that it literally replaced the native systems make command and
launched the
I've been getting my hands dirty with CMake in recent weeks, and I now
firmly believe that's the way to go with respect to a Windows build
system for TigerVNC. I don't propose replacing autotools (at least for
now), but CMake allows one to generate their own build system based on
NMake or Visual S
