Hi Brennan and Matias, I think it is worth the effort to get the remaining boards converted to cmake, but I think we need to find an easy way to keep Makefile and CMake in sync. Otherwise people will have double work adding support for two building systems.
I don't know if it is easy to create a script to parse the boards' makefile and convert it to CMakefile.txt, but it could help to keep it in sync. Maybe people don't realize the issues with current building system, because it works fine on Linux. But for other OS it is slow and have other maintenance issues. I think it is important to support CMake, but we need a soft experience/transition. BR, Alan On 6/9/21, Brennan Ashton <bash...@brennanashton.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021, 11:04 AM Fotis Panagiotopoulos <f.j.pa...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> For me, cmake would be a no. >> The reasons are greatly outlined by Sebastien. >> >> However, I am not very experienced with it. (I just never liked it...) >> Are there any hard advantages that would justify such a migration? >> >> Are there things that can only be done in cmake, or that are so much >> easier >> that it is worth it? >> Does it have any special features that we need or definitely want? >> > > So for me here is the short list: > > The builds a much much faster especially for incremental builds. This is > even more true for non Linux environments. This is a big deal for testing > as well as for the individual developer. > > We continue to have to handle issues around OS specific things for paths > and scripting tools. For some of this we currently have to carry custom > tools to help and those tools are not know outside of the project. > > Some of our custom tools like mkdeps fall short especially when trying to > integrate third party libraries. We can continue to invest in our tools > here or use things that already exist and are well tested. This has been a > huge pain getting things like LTP integrated to improve our testing. > > IDE support. While you can certainly use and IDE with NuttX at it exists > today, it is not aware of the build system in any reasonable way which does > make integration harder. > > Management of build settings and overrides. These are possible today but > much harder to keep consistent across all the different builds as we > continue to see. > > > That all said if people are not onboard it's not worth half doing. I have > been supportive, but I do not want to push this on people. > > --Brennan >
