Re: Some random thoughs and questions on the future of GNUstep

[Helge Hess]

On Oct 1, 2006, at 20:54, Nikolaus Waxweiler wrote:
> > What I miss about your proposal is outlining actual problems  
> > GNUstep has and which would be solved by using cmake (and how).
> CMake was just the next best example I had ("[...] or better:  
> Moving Away From GNUstep Make") and there's also gsjam, but as  
> said, I still have to look into that. The general idea was, as  
> stated, to outsource as much work as possible to be able to  
> concentrate on -base, -gui and -back, I then just listed what CMake  
> can do. Others already stated that a switch right now to *any*  
> other build system would be more work than it's worth, and well,  
> I'll just continue tinkering and see what comes up :)

Exactly. But even there is little reason to "outsource" gnustep-make  
work because its already done and needs little maintenance. And cmake  
etc doesn't help us with ObjC/GNUstep specific things like PCH  
support either ;-)

> Nah, CMake is a cross-platform reinvention of Autotools :P. GS-M is  
> a reinvention insofar that it's a complete build system.

I honestly don't get it, _re_invention of what? :-) It just a set of  
utilities which can be used with make. Its still plain old (GNU...)  
make.

> > I would be interested to see how a typical GNUstep make package  
> > would look like in cmake.
> Do you mean a GNUmakefile? In the ideal/simplest case, a  
> CMakeLists.txt for an application would look like
>
>    FIND_PACKAGE(GNUstep REQUIRED)
>    ADD_EXECUTABLE(SomeApp GNUSTEP_BUNDLE source1.m source2.c  
> source3.mm)
>
> or maybe
>
>    FIND_PACKAGE(GNUstep REQUIRED)
>    GNUSTEP_APP(SomeApp source1.m source2.c source3.mm)
>
> I'll see.

Yup.

Greets,
  Helge
--
Helge Hess
http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/helge/