[reSIProcate] dumping autotools and moving to CMake?

[Francis Joanis]

Hi again,

I put together a small “proof of concept” that builds the core of rutil and its tests using CMake (sorry if someone else had started it):

https://github.com/fjoanis/resiprocate/tree/b-fjoanis-cmake-temp

I have only tested it on Mac OS so far… and the default clang compiler is spewing warnings. However, it does compile the “core” and also runs the unit tests (see https://github.com/fjoanis/resiprocate/blob/b-fjoanis-cmake-temp/README.cmake for more info).

I think I’ll keep playing a bit in this github branch until we decide to officially give it a try. At that point, the proper thing would be to use an official resiprocate SVN branch.

Let me know if you have any question.

Cheers,
Francis

On Jan 5, 2014, at 4:08 PM, Francis Joanis <francis.joanis at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi guys,
> 
> I've used CMake in the past to support Unix + Windows (nmake and Visual Studio) builds of a few projects.
> 
> I like CMake and the fact that a _single_ set of "make files" are used to generate the build scripts for the various platforms. This makes a few things like adding a new file to a project easier. We could also leverage CTest to run the unit/automated tests.
> 
> CMake is very powerful and can probably handle all the needs for the project. I haven't been involved much with resip lately, but I think CMake would be a good fit since resip is being actively used and maintained on both Unix and Windows.
> 
> We could use mingw/Cygwin/... with autotools for Windows but I think native MS builds will still be a requirement for some/most Windows users.
> 
> I'm available to help with the CMake port if we want to see how it goes. Has a sandbox branch been created yet?
> 
> Thanks and happy new year,
> Francis
> 
> On Jan 4, 2014, at 10:31 PM, Byron Campen <docfaraday at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Yes, any change like this would be an inconvenience to some. I hope that we could get an idea of how many would have a difficult time with a change like this, so if anyone falls into this category, please speak up. We are very much in a phase where we need this input.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Byron Campen
>> 
>> On Jan 4, 2014 5:47 PM, "Joegen Baclor" <jbaclor at ezuce.com> wrote:
>> On 01/05/2014 12:24 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> 
>> On 04/01/14 17:18, Byron Campen wrote:
>>       While I do like cmake, it is not a panacea, and there are some sharp
>> edges. I think it might be illustrative to try writing a cmake build for
>> rutil/stack (plus tests), and see how much pain we run into. I can give
>> this a go, since I have some experience with it.
>> 
>> 
>> Any feedback about it would be great, feel free to add to the wiki as well
>> 
>> In terms of priorities, I think that any cmake effort can probably wait
>> until after the 1.9.0 release has been tagged though.  Most of my own
>> tweaks are now committed and will appear in a beta9 tarball very soon
>> and it would be useful to have any final concerns/problems listed if
>> anybody thinks it is not suitable for release.
>> 
>> 
>> It is worth mentioning that some projects (like mine) has integrated resiprocate as a native submodule utilizing the capability of autotools to nest other project within a single homogeneous build. This is not a complaint but just a side note.  Whatever works best for resiprocate, I won't have trouble with.
>> _______________________________________________
>> resiprocate-devel mailing list
>> resiprocate-devel at resiprocate.org
>> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.resiprocate.org/pipermail/resiprocate-devel/attachments/20140105/4956b510/attachment.htm>