On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 18:11 -0600, Callum Lerwick wrote: > On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 10:05 +0100, yersinia wrote: > > > > Perhaps off topic. Someone know the prons/cons of scons > > > > http://www.scons.org/? > > My first impression is that it is very similar to cmake as design > > phylosophy, but use only phyton on the target system and this a plus, > > IMHO. > > No, despite hype leading you to believe otherwise, SCons is not in the > same class as autotools or CMake. SCons is only marginally better than > hand-hacking makefiles. I can't recommend it. > > I speak from experience with the Second Life client. SCons got changed > out for CMake for good reason... For the record (see other branch of this thread), waf is a sorta-fork of SCons, they're similar in several ways - the waf developer decided to things His Way. This is waf's Why We're So Great page: http://code.google.com/p/waf/wiki/WafAndOtherBuildSystems -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
