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

Chandler Carruth chandlerc at google.com
Tue Mar 10 20:23:42 PDT 2015

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Owen Anderson <resistor at mac.com> wrote:

> 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> 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
> And further elaborated on it:
> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/82793
> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/83315
> I’m not sure what further degree of specificity you’re looking for.

Sorry, I didn't read back all of the context and instead was replying to
the specific thing Chris said when he CC-ed me: "Either way, at the moment
I have no patches to land which use new features of CMake".

All I am suggesting is that when we have something we want to do that
requires a new feature we use that goodness as the basis of the discussion
about whether or not to raise the minimum version. Essentially, I'm
suggesting to delay moving the version around until we're actually ready to
make use of the new version and features, and then to have the discussion
in that context.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150310/24b6fb7f/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list