Re: [dev] [OFFTOPIC] Recommended meta-build system

From: Armando Di Cianno <>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 09:04:14 -0500


I worked with the people at Kitware, Inc. for a while (here in
beautiful upstate New York), and they wrote and maintain CMake [1]. I
believe KDE, IIRC, has used CMake for a while now (which is at least a
testament to the complexity it can handle).

IMHO, CMake does not have a great syntax, but it's easy to learn and
write. Again, IMHO, orders of magnitude easier to understand than GNU
auto*tools -- although it is a bit pedantic (e.g. closing if branches
with the condition to match the opening).

However, for all its faults, it's *really* easy to use, and the
for-free GUIs (ncurses or multi-platforms' GUIs), are icing on the
cake. The simple ncurses GUI is nice to have when reconfiguring a
project -- it can really speed things up.

> stuff like "has vsnprintf?" that configure deals with.) In addition,
> it'd be nice to be able to have options like "debugging", "release",
> "grof-compiled", etc, similar to procesor specification.
> It would be preferrable if all
> object files and executables could coexist (because it's a C++
> template heavy

CMake can do all this for you, and it works great with C and C++
projects (really, that's the only reason one would use it).


Received on Mon Jan 25 2010 - 14:04:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jan 25 2010 - 14:12:02 UTC