From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: CMake build anyone? Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 01:04:52 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87aapfxyhc.fsf@telefonica.net> <87wrsjwijl.fsf@telefonica.net> <83mxtfb7uo.fsf@gnu.org> <874ofnw8j4.fsf@telefonica.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1280099128 24554 80.91.229.12 (25 Jul 2010 23:05:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 23:05:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 26 01:05:26 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OdAG2-0002Aq-Gc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 01:05:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33064 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OdAG2-0000hQ-2D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 19:05:22 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=58664 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OdAFw-0000gr-7J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 19:05:17 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OdAFt-00089S-FM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 19:05:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-bw0-f41.google.com ([209.85.214.41]:34314) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OdAFt-00089O-9d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 19:05:13 -0400 Original-Received: by bwz9 with SMTP id 9so3045480bwz.0 for ; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 16:05:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=eZvDJbxSHyCiSqeDxb/6ANSA+nb4rB5TrvFl954sBVM=; b=ahDsOKWzGcl12RIjy/+JVWhamw+yhbULq7F/8Z8kKYCJxn5SXjpTcfaTaFymR2Epjy V3/U/3uR5BOw/c6SWaavSwM9LpfmlW9M+h0Ac6DQikfVZB0/VfeCALJe0C4tZ/D3vB0P bwjdXMfuceC6Ptu5sVSwQ3kpLW+EB5DPFYMQc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=uAkEQM9lFwDMoSCUfGNYXhhjPqc6gPSG5/9k3BKJBF4J9+UgKyufPpgvd7UpdQLoNV yFGs2LraL4zQz2UnesbSe4fDYbIaG8J5vRtSeS/J3/pSxNQmUMkp4PpsnbM6bGql9p8q ZKQ/vl/fiTSMjYBaCZzGLIzA1PkDvonvJ6A5E= Original-Received: by 10.204.51.67 with SMTP id c3mr3871557bkg.69.1280099112109; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 16:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.204.180.136 with HTTP; Sun, 25 Jul 2010 16:04:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <874ofnw8j4.fsf@telefonica.net> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:127807 Archived-At: On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 23:34, =C3=93scar Fuentes wrote: > A CMake install is required. Why? (Note: I'm talking only about MSDOS/Windows.) You envision CMake as substituting the current Windows building environment wholesale. My idea is more like this: - We have the configuration files in some place, like admin/setup. They are common for all ports (Unix, GNU/Linux, NextStep, MSDOS, Windows, etc.). - Developers, or users with CMake, can run the tool and (re)generate the makefiles. These makefiles get committed to the trunk/branch, and contain dependencies which are always needed, like gcc / msvc, etc. - Users or the tarballs or checkouts can run nt/configure.bat (or equivalent) to create the additional setup info (for example, paths to include files for the image libraries). I.e, I think the easiest transition path is having CMake as a tool *for the maintainers*, to regenerate the makefiles. It's not optimal, and I don't doubt that switching to a CMake-only build system would be advantageous; but it introduces a new dependency and it is perhaps too radical a change. Instead, we can use it like the makeinfo stuff or the Unicode data files from admin/unidata are used right now: the user can regenerate info or uni-*.el files, but it is usually not required. > For the time being, we can put MSDOS aside and go ahead if cmake is seen > as convenient enough by the Windows maintainers. As long as it is an alternative and not a replacement, it seems like a good idea worth trying IMHO. All this conditional on RMS, Stefan and Chong not opposing using CMake as an alternate build system for political or technical reasons, of course. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Juanma