[reSIProcate] dumping autotools and moving to CMake?

[Byron Campen]

     I would be pretty surprised to find something like that. I do see 
some examples of converters from automake to cmake, although I don't 
know whether they actually work well.

Best regards,
Byron Campen

On 1/5/14 9:48 AM, Scott Godin wrote:
> Anyone know of any good tools that could generate Visual Studio 
> project files from autotools build configs?  It might be nice to keep 
> autotools and have some way of autogenerating the Windows build files 
> too.
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Byron Campen <docfaraday at gmail.com 
> <mailto: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
>     <mailto: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
>     <mailto: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/20140105/01c87ccf/attachment.htm>