[Bf-committers] Re: handcrafted makefiles, autotools, scons and cmake ?

[Austin Benesh]

I'm all for it, so long as it produces perfectly compilable versions of 
every build system, every time. Can it do that?

 - Austin

GSR wrote:
> Hi,
> joeedh at gmail.com (2006-07-09 at 1622.02 -0700):
>   
>> Hans Lambermont wrote:
>>     
>>> This might be interesting to Blender too : "CMake" http://www.cmake.org/ .
>>>
>>> A nice read about CMake : "Why the KDE project switched to CMake"
>>> http://lwn.net/Articles/188693/ (which also has an interesting blurp on
>>> KDE's CVS to Subversion switch).
>>>
>>> In brief : KDE used autotools, evaluated SCons and finally choose CMake.
>>> CMake supports basically every UNIX, MS Windows (MSVC, Borland, cygwin,
>>> mingw) and Mac OS X. CMake can generate Makefiles ... and XCode (Mac OS
>>> X IDE) and several versions of MS Visual Studio (Windows IDE, >=7).
>>>
>>>       
>> IMHO I think this would be a bad idea.  At the moment, coders are 
>> expected to maintain the makefiles and SConscripts, not to mention 
>> keeping the VC 7/8 project files up-to-date if they can.
>>
>> We don't need more then four build systems, surely.
>>     
>
> The point is they would only maintain one (1) and only one, which is
> more than zero and less than two, and shalt thou count to one, no
> more, no less (this holy grenade has a faster fuse)... and that system
> should work in a varied range of compiler/OS/etc setups.
>
> GSR
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at projects.blender.org
> http://projects.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>
>