[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [libmicrohttpd] Draft of CMake build script

From: Štefan Bellus
Subject: Re: [libmicrohttpd] Draft of CMake build script
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 09:22:57 +0200


Sorry That I do no reply on mails, but I did not received any even if I am subscribed.
I only noticed your reply in archive.

By using CMake we could get rid of MSVC projects, but maintaining CMake is way harder then MSVC project in current state

Yes. The benefit will be achieved only if you  use only CMake. No autotools, MSVC projects.
I convert the autotools to CMake to check if possible to replace it with CMake. 
I found out that it is possible. It take me 2 days to convert it. But it not waste of time. I learn how to configure sources in CMake and I learn also how autotools configure sources.

> What about meson?

It is cool. The syntax is nice. They keep the idea of describing the build in general language and
let the back-end (CMake or meson) to generate specific commands for underlying build systems.
The syntax of this general language is much better in meson.
I votes for meson :)
I am little bit skeptic because more and more people start to use CMake nowadays. But meson is written in python and a lot of more people can use python as C/CPP (CMake is written in C/CPP) and contribute to meson.
I guess if meson also introduce some package manager for C (something like Java maven repositories or C# Nuget) they will win.

I am a maintainer of project that depends on your library. I would love if you can provide same build system on all platforms. It really make thinks easier.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]