On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Christoph Wickert <christoph.wickert@googlemail.com> wrote:
Am Montag, den 26.09.2011, 12:40 +0800 schrieb PCMan:
> Hi,
> Since many people agreed that autotools is aged, horribly slow,
> complicated, poorly documented, and hard to use correctly, I'm
> currently doing some experiments with CMake, yet another build system.


I don't recall people complaining about autotools and IHMO LXDE has
other problems, e.g. the release of PCManFM 1.0, a stable version of
LXPolkit or LXApperance-obconf and so on. Until this is done, we should
not switch the build system.

1. Package doesn't build is a frequent problem we met, but autotols based stuff is hard to fix and hard to get right. Extending it even requires mixed m4 macro + shell scripts. I even spent more time on automake than real programming, just to get my source code built.

2. Having a correct build process requires correct interplay between autoconf, automake, libtools, and others, which exert different behavior in different versions.

3. The build process by autotools is painfully slow. It's even slower if libtool is used. This slow down the development. Everytime I modified the source code, it takes much time to rebuild the new binary for testing. CMakes runs much faster and has nice and clear compiler output.

4. The out of source build support is really useful. All generated files are outside of the source tree. So virtually everything in the source directory are required and should be in version control system. This greatly decreases the maintaince load of developers and we will not have missing files in the repo or we won't accidentally add some generated files to VCS, which happens quite often in the past.

5. For people who type ./configure && make, this won't make visible changes. However, this makes developers more productive. The later we do the migration, the more things need to be rewritten and the migration may be more difficult and time-consuming. So I don't think this should be given a low priority, even when it looks less important.

> From package maintainers' perspective, will using CMake make packaging
> process more difficult?

Not necessarily more difficult, but different.


All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a
definitive record of customers, application performance, security
threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense.
Lxde-list mailing list