| |||||||||||||
Why the KDE project switched to CMake -- and how (continued)Why the KDE project switched to CMake -- and how (continued)Posted Jun 22, 2006 9:20 UTC (Thu) by kleptog (subscriber, #1183)In reply to: Why the KDE project switched to CMake -- and how (continued) by cventers Parent article: Why the KDE project switched to CMake -- and how (continued)
I can see the benefits of tossing automake and libtool, but there are plenty of projects out there that use autoconf for configuration and standard makefiles for the building. I've looked at the website but I don't think CMake can provide much benefit for these projects.
Nice article though.
(Log in to post comments)
Why the KDE project switched to CMake -- and how (continued) Posted Jun 22, 2006 9:23 UTC (Thu) by aleXXX (subscriber, #2742) [Link] For everybody who is happy with autotools there is no reason to switch,for everybody else CMake is an alternative. Alex
Why the KDE project switched to CMake -- and how (continued) Posted Jun 22, 2006 9:40 UTC (Thu) by kleptog (subscriber, #1183) [Link] I don't know about happy. I was just trying to clarify that a project using only autoconf but not automake would have to switch to CMake generated makefiles instead their own. That is, in CMake the configure step cannot be seperated from the automake step.
I'm just asking because while I'm not a great fan of autoconf, I'd only replace it with something that would let me keep my hand created makefiles.
Why the KDE project switched to CMake -- and how (continued) Posted Jun 22, 2006 10:35 UTC (Thu) by aleXXX (subscriber, #2742) [Link] Yes, CMake replaces all three of them.It will create the Makefiles for you (... and project files if you want to). Alex
|
|||||||||||||