On 5 January 2015 at 23:20, Stephen Fisher <sfis...@sdf.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 03:34:16PM -0500, Ed Beroset wrote: > > > Having been around this particular block a couple of times, yes, CMake > > at times is a battle, but it's also better than the alternative of > > producing (and maintaining) multiple mutually incompatible and > > inevitably arbitrarily different build systems in parallel. > > The beauty of autoconf/automake on Unix is that it spits out standard > MakefileS so that normal users don't have to install a special program > just to build the software. I haven't tried Wireshark with CMake yet, > but doesn't every user have to install it to build the software? Or can > cmake's output be included in source distributions so only developers > need it? > > The devastating failure of autoconf\automake (ac\am) is that it isn't cross platform.
CMake does the same job as ac\am but cross platform, and in the same way as ac\am you can't really ship the outputs (makefile or VS solution\vcproj) for use on other systems as they might be configured differently. CMake should be at least as easy to install as ac\am on all platforms and considerably easier on Windows (plus it works on Windows with normal Windows build tools). -- Graham Bloice
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
