Re: In future, to replace autotools by cmake like KDE4 did?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Andreas Ericsson wrote:
> Jakub Narebski wrote:
> > 
> > Although there was some talk about whether giw should use autotools,
> > or perhaps CMake, or handmade ./configure script like MPlayer IIRC,
> > instead of its own handmade Makefile...
> > 
> 
> To tell the truth, I'd be much happier if everything like that got
> put in a header file or some such. 95% of what we figure out by looking
> at "uname" output can already be learned by looking at the various
> pre-defined macros.
> 
> Fortunately, there's a project devoted solely to this, so most of
> the tedious research need not be done. It can be found at
> http://predef.sourceforge.net/

Code talks, bullsh*t walks.

Pre-defined macros cannot tell us if one have specific libraries
installed, cannot tell us if formatted IO functions support 'size
specifiers' even though compiler claim C99 compliance or even though
compiler doesn't claim C99 compliance but supports this, etc.

But perhaps the "uname" based compile configuration could be replaced
by testing pre-defined macros... at least for C code, and git is not
only C code.

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux