[linux-elitists] Is this not the funniest documentation you ever read?
Mon Oct 20 08:03:32 PDT 2008
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Adam Sampson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Shlomi Fish <email@example.com> writes:
>> And from my impression, it's not "crack" because it works very well.
> From a packager's perspective, CMake is the only automake replacement
> I've seen that's even vaguely credible in terms of making it possible to
> install and package software built with it -- so yeah, I guess it gets
> my vote too. I wish the syntax weren't so ugly, though.
There's a steep learning curve to it, but it's more than vaguely
credible. We've moved all server and client components of Second Life
 over to cmake, and we have no regrets. We did run into a couple
cmake limitations along the way, but the cmake devs (specifically Bill
Hoffman at Kitware ) were incredibly responsive in both adding
wanted features to cmake, and in pointing out what we'd done wrong
ourselves. Bill even logged on to Second Life to hold a conference
with some of our outside contributors.
We now support many development platforms on each of Linux, Windows
and OS X with a single set of configuration files. Of note, cmake
generates for IDEs in addition to traditional makefiles, which is a
huge plus as we have many Mac and Windows developers on the project,
inside the Lab and out. For that matter, KDevelop and Eclipse even
start to look attractive when you don't have to maintain your own
project files anymore.
More information about the linux-elitists