From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: CMake build anyone? Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:04:18 +0200 Message-ID: <87y6cxucgt.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <87aapfxyhc.fsf@telefonica.net> <87wrsjwijl.fsf@telefonica.net> <83mxtfb7uo.fsf@gnu.org> <874ofnw8j4.fsf@telefonica.net> <83hbjnaqli.fsf@gnu.org> <837hkib28j.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1280181886 17972 80.91.229.12 (26 Jul 2010 22:04:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 22:04:46 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 27 00:04:44 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 1OdVmt-00075o-9c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:04:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55279 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OdVms-000862-Pr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:04:42 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=47205 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OdVmm-00085R-Vd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:04:37 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OdVml-0006tN-LD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:04:36 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:46386) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OdVml-0006tD-AH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:04:35 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OdVmh-00072Y-Kn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:04:31 +0200 Original-Received: from 83.42.13.171 ([83.42.13.171]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:04:31 +0200 Original-Received: from ofv by 83.42.13.171 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:04:31 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 32 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.42.13.171 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:pA5EofqkWHQoZjwGnYuckig0MGw= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:127858 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: > From what I heard, CMake is an interesting tool and we may consider > using it for Emacs. But the way I see it, it only really makes sense to > do that if it can be used for "all" platforms and/or if it can be used > to reduce the amount of stuff to install (e.g. in Windows). CMake scripts are inherently cross-platform and in the case of Emacs the build would work for all platforms, except MSDOS. Cross-compiling could be used for generating MSDOS executables, but Eli already explained that bootstrapping Emacs on MSDOS is required by DJGPP. On Windows, we remove one requirement (`rm' and `cp') and add another (cmake.) CMake does lots of other interesting things, though. This is a partial list of the features and benefits provided by cmake (`cmake' here includes `ctest' and `cpack'): http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/Really_Cool_CMake_Features > So unless CMake can be used to make it easier to install Emacs on > Windows, I think it'll have to wait until cmake is likely to be > installed on most unixy systems. I.e. don't hold your breath. Fair enough. But please note that I was not proposing replacing the current autoconf build with cmake (although some users could benefit from having a cmake build on Unix, see the feature list linked above.) My proposal was motivated by my impression about the Windows build being hard to maintain and I thought that the developers could be interested on an alternative that removes most of the burden so they can focus their efforts elsewhere. Since only Juanma expressed some interest and other people objected, let's forget the proposal and move on.