[LLVMdev] [RFC] Raise minimum required CMake version to 3.0

Owen Anderson resistor at mac.com
Tue Mar 10 20:15:38 PDT 2015

> On Mar 10, 2015, at 6:08 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com <mailto:rafael.espindola at gmail.com>> wrote:
> As for the advantages, this seems to make it easier to drop the
> autoconf build, which would be a really big win for us.
> My only problem here is this: it *seems*.
> I would like concrete and specific advantages. I think we're just being way too hypothetical and vague.
> If there are specific things that we cannot do today and could do by requiring a certain version of cmake, that would be a good discussion to have. Saying that there might be things and that they might help isn't going to get us anywhere. ;]

Chris provided a detailed list of desirable features for us in newer versions of CMake in this very thread:

http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/82824 <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/82824>

And further elaborated on it:

http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/82793 <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/82793>
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/83315 <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/83315>

I’m not sure what further degree of specificity you’re looking for.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150310/1e2f9289/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list