[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Multi-platform build system
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: Multi-platform build system |
Date: |
Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:55:09 +0900 |
Óscar Fuentes <address@hidden> writes:
> Experience shows that a cmake spec usually is a fraction of the
> length of the equivalent autoconf+automake/Makefile spec,
> line-wise. Maintenance work is proportionally reduced. It's easier
> to add new features, too.
Off-topic, but I'm quite skeptical of this claim, compared to
automake. Makefile.am files tend to be pretty darn close to the
minimal amount of information required to build (in typical cases: a
list of source files), and very easy to extend.
Automake's implementation is not very pretty, but the interface
presented to the user is extremely good.
-Miles
--
Cannon, n. An instrument employed in the rectification of national boundaries.
- Building Emacs on Windows with MinGW+MSYS (was: Emacs pretest 24.0.90), Dani Moncayo, 2011/10/13
- Re: Multi-platform build system (was: Building Emacs on Windows with MinGW+MSYS), Dan Nicolaescu, 2011/10/13
- Re: Multi-platform build system, Óscar Fuentes, 2011/10/13
- Re: Multi-platform build system, Dan Nicolaescu, 2011/10/14
- Re: Multi-platform build system (was: Building Emacs on Windows with MinGW+MSYS), Juanma Barranquero, 2011/10/13
- Re: Multi-platform build system (was: Building Emacs on Windows with MinGW+MSYS), Christoph Scholtes, 2011/10/13
- Re: Multi-platform build system (was: Building Emacs on Windows with MinGW+MSYS), Juanma Barranquero, 2011/10/13
- Re: Multi-platform build system, Óscar Fuentes, 2011/10/13
- Re: Multi-platform build system, Óscar Fuentes, 2011/10/13
- Re: Multi-platform build system, Juanma Barranquero, 2011/10/13