CMake (Re: GNU make version)
bjoern.michaelsen at canonical.com
Wed Mar 7 04:28:09 PST 2012
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 12:57:11PM +0100, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> I'm not build system expert, but judging from my CMake experience in KDE, [...]
If you want to start a discussion about the build system to use, you are two
years too late. Two years ago, gnu make was the best candidate and in many ways
it still is. If there is no pressing reason to use CMake now that is worth the
migration costs (which is in manyears, if you include all the disruptions it
causes along the way) there is no point in discussing this.
I wont tear apart your points on CMake, which are ignoring the specifics of OOo
at that time -- most importantly three-layer office(*), for that reason. If you
have a simple patch that magically replaces gbuild with CMake everywhere and on
all platforms without any major disruptions _and_ has a unique selling point
over GNU make, we can come back on this. If not, any further discussion on this
is wasting everyones time.
Lets just finish this migration and kill of dmake and build.pl instead.
(*) And trust me, CMake was tested back then. But it just proved the 'breaking
your toolchain since 1985'-mem like everything else. Its 'added-value' was none
for us as we would have to work around the default assumptions didnt match
More information about the LibreOffice