On Thu, 2015-11-26 at 19:36 +0000, Roger Leigh wrote: > On 26/11/2015 17:53, Svante Signell wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-11-26 at 17:04 +0000, Roger Leigh wrote: > > > On 26/11/2015 15:00, Svante Signell wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2015-11-26 at 15:33 +0100, aitor_czr wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, what's wrong with plain GNU make, and the GNU auto-tools? > > > > > Then you are a happy user of cmake. I'm working on porting packages for > > GNU/Hurd and every time when I encounter packages using cmake the confusion > > increases. It seems almost impossible to find out where to make changes and, > > the build process is not traceable. (maybe It's just me :( ) > > You looked at CMakeFiles/CMake(Output|Error) ? Most stuff should be > logged there. And if you need to trace, message(WARNING) will print a > trace along with the diagnostic.
Well, as long as you work with configure.ac, Makefile.am and confiugre.h.in level for files you won't have any problems with make/autotools. The rest is mostly hidden (and by now stable) from a user perspective. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
