On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Martin Lucina<martin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
dirkjan@xxxxxxxxxx said:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Martin Sustrik<sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thougts anyone? Arguments for keeping the 0MQ compatibility library in
place?
I think removing the compatibility library would be fine, for the
reasons you state.
+1
Just curious, what's the motivation behind reintroducing autoconf?
Has CMake not lived up to its major promise which (AFAIK) is a unified
build system for Windows and POSIX?
CMake support for cross-compilation is severely lacking in usability
and I wanted to use nanomsg Gentoo even when crossdev is involved.
Plus the fact that having a large C++ dependency on a pure C library
feels bad. (To remind people, autotools generated distributions do not
require autotools, you are fine with bash an make, cmake distributions
do require cmake)
