Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #69103
| Message-ID | <685b2f8b@news.ausics.net> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| From | not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) |
| Subject | Re: Software Building Status. A Growing Annoyance. |
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.misc |
| References | <pan$be9fc$809aad21$e409cc51$526fec52@linux.rocks> |
| Date | 2025-06-25 09:06 +1000 |
| Organization | Ausics - https://newsgroups.ausics.net |
[ deliberately contradicting the Followup-To ] In comp.os.linux.misc Nux Vomica <nv@linux.rocks> wrote: > Thus, other build systems were created and more and more software > packages are moving to them. On contemporary GNU/Linux, the most > commonly used alternate build systems are: > > Cmake > > Meson (using Ninja as backend) > > So what's the problem? > > The difficulty is that now the software builder has to learn > several different systems and things are no longer as simple > as they once were with Autotools. Compared to Autotools, these > alternative build systems are decidedly more complex for the > builder even if they might make things easier for the programmer. Indeed! I don't know if I've encountered Meson, but CMake drives me up the wall. It's also far more restrictive for compatibility than Autotools' configure scripts - you need a recent version of CMake installed to build recent source code releases. The CMake developers ignored requests for an equivalent to "./configure --help" early on, willfully making the transition difficult for software builders. I think they have a Windows-centric attitude where they expect only the software developers to be compiling things and hence making the build settings easy to understand for others isn't a priority. Granted if projects actually followed their advice to document the CMake build settings they use, that would help too. > I am always in favor of choice. In fact, choice is one of the > great strengths of GNU/Linux. Yet when it comes to software > building from source I feel that only a single protocol is > necessary. If looking for new software that I'll need to build myself, then CMake is an immediate turn-off - I'll choose an alternative. It's difficult when software I'm already building and using switches to CMake though. -- __ __ #_ < |\| |< _#
Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Software Building Status. A Growing Annoyance. Nux Vomica <nv@linux.rocks> - 2025-06-24 17:52 +0000
Re: Software Building Status. A Growing Annoyance. not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-06-25 09:06 +1000
Re: Software Building Status. A Growing Annoyance. Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-24 23:48 +0000
Re: Software Building Status. A Growing Annoyance. Nux Vomica <nv@linux.rocks> - 2025-06-29 13:28 +0000
Re: Software Building Status. A Growing Annoyance. not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-06-30 09:13 +1000
Re: Software Building Status. A Growing Annoyance. Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-29 23:50 +0000
csiph-web