<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Oct 31, 2014, at 4:19 PM, Eric Christopher <<a href="mailto:echristo@gmail.com" class="">echristo@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><br class=""><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri Oct 31 2014 at 3:11:22 PM Tom Stellard <<a href="mailto:tom@stellard.net" class="">tom@stellard.net</a>> wrote:<br class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br class="">
<br class="">
I would like to propose deprecating the autoconf build system at some<br class="">
point in the future. Maintaining two build systems is a hassle not<br class="">
only for this project, but also for other projects that use LLVM<br class="">
and have to deal with the slight differences in output between the two<br class="">
build systems.<br class="">
<br class="">
It seems like most people are using CMake at this point, so my questions<br class="">
to the community are:<br class="">
<br class="">
- Is there any technical reason why the remaining autoconf users can't switch<br class="">
to CMake?<br class="">
<br class=""></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I think Bob was the lead on keeping the autoconf system last year when this came up, there is a PR somewhere in the system about the blocking things that need to work in cmake to get it to happen. I don't know where we are on that list or what features people still need.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>I’ve come around to the point of accepting the inevitability of moving to cmake, but I think there’s quite a bit of work to be done to get everything to work. The compiler-rt build in particular is problematic.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Personally I still use the autoconf system, but am willing to remove it if we can get to a single system, but all of the requirements need to be handled first.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">-eric</div><div class=""> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
For example, I personally use automake, and the only reason I don't<br class="">
use CMake is because it doesn't produce a single shared object<br class="">
(e.g. <a href="http://libllvm-3.6.0svn.so/" target="_blank" class="">libLLVM-3.6.0svn.so</a>).<br class="">
<br class="">
- What is a reasonable timeframe to allow the remaining autoconf users<br class="">
a chance to migrate to CMake?</blockquote></div></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div>I don’t know how to answer that. Someone will need to do the work to first identify all the problems and then to get them fixed.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Converting everything to cmake will take quite a lot of work. In comparison, the minor hassle of keeping the makefiles working for a bit longer seems pretty insignificant.</div></body></html>