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

Manuel Klimek klimek at google.com
Thu Jun 21 09:08:32 PDT 2012

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote:

> On Jun 20, 2012, at 11:00 PM, C. Bergström <cbergstrom at pathscale.com>
> wrote:
> > On 06/21/12 12:47 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com
> >> <mailto: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!
> >>
> >>
> >> FWIW, I'm also under the impression that Apple's internal release
> >> process depends on configure+make as well.
> > clang/llvm are advertised as being independent of Apple.  There's a ton
> > of companies using the project, but we should let them speak-up if they
> > *really* need it to stay around.
> OK, I'm speaking up: We *really* need configure+make to stick around a bit
> longer.  Daniel has had to spend lots of time on other projects that came
> up, especially fighting against compile time performance regressions, so
> the new LLVM build system has not made much progress recently.  As
> discussed in depth before, Cmake is not a good solution for us and we need
> configure+make to keep working until we have a suitable replacement.

So what would we need to change in cmake to make it a good solution for you?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20120621/0ecb3302/attachment.html>

More information about the cfe-dev mailing list