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

[Chandler Carruth]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> wrote:

> > On Mar 10, 2015, at 2:53 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 10 March 2015 at 21:30, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>
> wrote:
> >> In the absence of specific features which would make our use of CMake
> >> significantly better, I'm inclined to stick roughly to the version of
> CMake
> >> in the latest LTS release of ubuntu (I don't know the stable releases of
> >> debian well enough to cite it, but likely the same applies).
> >
> > 2.8.12.2 seems to be the common minimum version.
>
> Not if you include Debian stable, which is 2.8.9.
>

I think that is excessive. My experience with Ubuntu LTS and Debian Stable
is that Ubuntu LTS has a much more reasonably up-to-date software.


>
> >
> > Another thing to consider is the impact of CMake changes on buildbots.
> > It may not be possible to migrate all buildbots to newer versions, for
> > instance, Ubuntu is still stuck with 2.8.12.2 I think, but Debian
> > Jesse is already on 3.0.2 and Arch Linux on 3.1.3.
> >
> > The "advanced" features I want from CMake are:
> > * use pool = console (available in 3.0) to get rid of our ugly hack
> > due to short timeouts
> > * specify -DCMAKE_NINJA_LINK_POOL=2 so we can build on
> > multi-core/low-mem environments (or distcc).
> >
> > I don't think the second is even on the drawing board, though I
> > remember having suggested it a few years back.
> >
> > None of them would make the life of a new developer easier, though... :)
>
> Unless we have new developers who enjoy cross compilation.


I do think that cross compilation is an important use case, and I think
features helping support cross compilation would be very compelling here.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150310/7168a0e8/attachment.html>