[LLVMdev] Is there room for another build system?

[Kenneth Boyd]

Albert Graef wrote:
> Óscar Fuentes wrote:
>   
>> Albert Graef <Dr.Graef at t-online.de> writes:
>>     
>>> Here are some points worth considering:
>>> http://www.remlab.net/op/cmake.shtml (Some of these may already be
>>> addressed in newer cmake versions, I haven't checked recently.)
>>>       
>> [...]
>>
>> Please, some LLVM release manager (Tanya?), read Albert's web page and
>> evaluate how much impact have the issues he raises on your work.
>>     
>
> Note that the URL I referred to is not mine. I merely wanted to point 
> out that there are some possible issues to consider before throwing the 
> existing build system out of the window. Which might affect LLVM users 
> for whom the current build system works fine, like me. :)
>   
Especially where CMake is known *not* to work.  (CMake 2.6.0 cannot be 
used to build itself on my configuration: it refuses to generate MinGW 
makefiles because bash is on my path as \bin\sh.exe, and generates 
broken MSYS files because it insists on using Cygwin filepaths rather 
than MingW32 filepaths.)

I don't mind CMake as yet another configuration framework (especially if 
it brings up MSVC and other non-UNIXy targets), but tossing the autoconf 
framework (which does work, with very minor adjustments) will lock out 
native MingW32 builds.

Kenneth