Re: [Chicken-hackers] CMake vs. Autoconf

[Brandon J. Van Every]

felix winkelmann wrote:
> On 12/11/06, Brandon J. Van Every <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> >  - CMake is the future of Chicken.
>
> Well, that sounds a bit heavy, but I certainly prefer CMake to autotools.

I meant, "CMake is the future of the Chicken build system."  I can't 
imagine what else you'd do, unless someone came along with a mission 
critical build system written entirely in Scheme.  As far as I can see, 
that just ain't gonna happen, as there aren't enough Scheme users to 
support the evolution of such a tool.  It takes an organizational effort 
the size of, say, Kitware and the CMake community to implement proper 
build tool support.  Even then, not all build teams are created equal.  
Part of why the KDE folks dumped Scons for CMake, is the Scons folks 
really weren't helping them get on with their problems.  Whereas 
Kitware's assistance with CMake is stellar.  It bears mentioning that 
the 1st cut of the Chicken CMake build was provided by Bill Hoffman of 
Kitware, gratis.  It was awfully useful as starter code, but of course, 
the current build does not resemble it, as I've been working on it for a 
year.

> >  - CMake is the canonical method by which Chicken DISTRIBUTIONS are 
> > created.
> >  If you want to modify the canonical distro, you have to work with 
> > CMake.
>
> Currently not. I forgot what exactly was the problem, but will check 
> this once
> I find some time and get back to you (Brandon) to make it work again.

I recall Linux issues, and "magic steps" to make docs out of the wiki.  
But I'll wait for you to tell me what's up.


Cheers,
Brandon Van Every