From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: CMake build anyone? Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 01:11:50 +0200 Message-ID: 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> <87y6cxucgt.fsf@telefonica.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1280185931 30079 80.91.229.12 (26 Jul 2010 23:12:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 23:12:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 27 01:12:09 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 1OdWq7-0004dT-Dc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 01:12:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45485 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OdWq6-0005Yl-CT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:12:06 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=39813 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OdWpz-0005Yg-Ou for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:12:00 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OdWpw-00087e-Sv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:11:59 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:43995) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OdWpw-00087V-Mz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:11:56 -0400 Original-Received: from ceviche.home (vpn-132-204-232-65.acd.umontreal.ca [132.204.232.65]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o6QNBqEa018279; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:11:53 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id EF94B660BB; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 01:11:50 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <87y6cxucgt.fsf@telefonica.net> (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22=D3scar?= Fuentes"'s message of "Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:04:18 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV3586=0 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:127860 Archived-At: > 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.) I understand it, but I think it'd only work if the intention is to replace the current build system (and not just eventually), otherwise it'd mean maintaining two very different build systems, which doesn't sound much better than what we have now. > 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. As I said, I think it's a good idea, but Emacs being what it is, it'll probably only end up doing it many years from now (just like it took ages for Emacs to adopt ANSI C, and to fully make use of autoconf). Stefan