[LLVMdev] State of build system support in LLVM

[Michał Górny]

Dnia 2013-12-26, o godz. 09:29:39
Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> napisał(a):

> Going forward, I believe CMake is the preferred build system.  Eric
> Christopher floated the idea of jettisoning autoconf altogether, but maybe
> that's just because he has the dubious honor of maintaining the autoconf
> system.  ;)
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2013-May/062351.html

While I generally prefer autotools over cmake as more consistent
and having better design, I am all for it. Most of autoconf's
advantages are lost when custom Makefiles are used instead of automake,
and having two build systems always end up causing trouble
and confusion.

> As you pointed out, the CMake build doesn't quite have feature parity with
> the autoconf build system.  We have a tracking bug for it:
> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15732

I'm aware of that bug. However, I haven't seen much activity on fixing
the bugs. I'll start working on providing patches for at least some of
the issues.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 966 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20131226/d45af12f/attachment.sig>