Re: CMake build anyone?

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 19:07, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:

> No, Andreas got my drift correctly.  I was thinking first and foremost
> about building a release tarball.

Building a release tarball is not something most users do, so the
number of prerequisites is less important.

> Which won't work if I need to fix a bug or add a feature.  This is
> still Free Software, right?

I don't get your meaning. If you need to build, there are a bunch of
things you *have* to have installed. You talked about cp and rm (and
somehow considered GCC/MinGW a given) but surely free software users
also do fix the info files and will need makeinfo, won't they?

The point being: I'm not pushing for or against CMake, but at the end
of the day, it is just *one* more prerequisite among quite a few.

I think you see it as less useful because for you the makefiles wok
pretty well, as you said. Personally, I hate having to modify a
makefile or a .bat script. Not to mention having to study changes in
the Unix build system to determine whether they make sense in the
Windows side.

    Juanma