[nanomsg] Re: Release packaging and build systems
- From: luca barbato <luca.barbato@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:46:51 +0200
On Jul 24, 2013 11:12 AM, "Bruce Mitchener" <bruce.mitchener@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>>
>> The downside is, obviously, making it hard for windows-native-only
developers to participate in the development. However, the restriction is
acceptable. With the current market situation I would guess that Windows
devs would treat using minGW as a possibility to learn something from the
mainstream programming, rather than as using an obscure build tool.
>
>
> That isn't how Windows developers will see it. It simply wouldn't get
used.
>
> With CMake, you don't have to require that people learn CMake on Windows.
You can have pre-generated VS solutions in the release tarballs.
If you are an user, you just want the library, the headers and the debug
symbols, you do not care at all how they are produced as long they work.
If you are a developer and you are bound to learn either cmake or
autotools, since changing your solution to fit new files or
configuration won't get back to the original build system.
> CMake supports at least some cross-compilation and I've heard of people
using it for that. It even works with Crosstool NG.
Autotools let you compile with cl.exe if you really want.
If you deem necessary producing a solution file on release, the
makefile.amhad been written so it is easy to get you there.
lu
Other related posts:
