[cfe-dev] is configure+make dead yet?

[Charles Davis]

On Jun 20, 2012, at 6:19 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com> wrote:
> Is there anybody who is certain that our autoconf dependency needs to stay around? Are there developers stuck on systems that don't have a recent enough cmake in their most recent release, or maybe are using some features from configure+make that the cmake build system doesn't implement?
> 
> If nobody pipes up, I might actually try actually removing it!
> 
> There are definitely missing features in cmake. I'm actually working on adding one of them: support for compiler-rt. There are likely some others.
> 
> That said, I actually agree -- I think that cmake, while ugly, can be made to support all of our use cases. There are some use cases that autoconf+make can't support, so I'd rather we just pick cmake and bang on it until it works the way we want.
Now hold on there. I thought Daniel was supposed to be working on a new build system, based almost entirely in Python, specifically because he thought CMake was, uh... inadequate (to say the least). I've CC'd him in the hopes of getting his opinion.

On the other hand, +1 for gutting autoconf. I hate it, and it needs to die.

Chip

P.S. -- Chandler, please increase the font size in your mail client. It's very small and hard to read.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20120621/55d360e9/attachment.html>