Ed Hill wrote: > Kevin, if you *consistently* pushed for perceived improvements (that is, > advocated for "new-and-supposedly-improved" bits across the board) then > I could appreciate your views as a progressive and bleeding-edge sort > of guy. But when you simultaneously advocate for all-new build systems > while pining for older, less capable, and buggier (less standards > compliant) compilers then the inconsistencies stand out. It suggests > that you either lack a broad appreciation of the improvements or, > equally as damning, you are willing to ignore them since you are > focused solely on the changes that are immediately convenient or > appealing to you. Switching to CMake is a one-time change and will save you from a lot of changes to deal with backwards-incompatible autotools later. CMake tries hard to maintain backwards compatibility, see: http://www.cmake.org/cmake/help/cmake2.6docs.html#section_Compatibility%20Commands http://www.cmake.org/cmake/help/cmake2.6docs.html#section_Policies and also the older CMAKE_BACKWARDS_COMPATIBILITY mechanism, which is still supported, see the policy CMP0001: http://www.cmake.org/cmake/help/cmake2.6docs.html#policy:CMP0001 That's very different from the autotools' behavior of breaking things willy nilly (yet does not preclude fixing historical warts). You have to think in the longer term. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
