From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e37.co.us.ibm.com (e37.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.158]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 232A91A0350 for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 14:55:41 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from localhost by e37.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 10 Mar 2016 20:55:39 -0700 Received: from d03dlp02.boulder.ibm.com (9.17.202.178) by e37.co.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.137) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Thu, 10 Mar 2016 20:55:37 -0700 X-IBM-Helo: d03dlp02.boulder.ibm.com X-IBM-MailFrom: stewart@linux.vnet.ibm.com X-IBM-RcptTo: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.24]) by d03dlp02.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35BCA3E4003B for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2016 20:55:37 -0700 (MST) Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.216]) by b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id u2B3taAV23789626 for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 03:55:36 GMT Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id u2B3ta2F004194 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2016 22:55:36 -0500 Received: from birb.localdomain (birb.au.ibm.com [9.185.16.92]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id u2B3tZql004163; Thu, 10 Mar 2016 22:55:36 -0500 Received: by birb.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A926F229DB26; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 14:55:32 +1100 (AEDT) From: Stewart Smith To: Patrick Williams , Joel Stanley Cc: OpenBMC Maillist , OpenBMC Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH ipmi-fru-parser] RFC: use cmake. In-Reply-To: <87y49tb8u9.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1457044213-7365-1-git-send-email-openbmc-patches@stwcx.xyz> <1457044213-7365-2-git-send-email-openbmc-patches@stwcx.xyz> <20160308025325.GK6601@asimov.pw-on-the.net> <87y49tb8u9.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.21+24~gbceb651 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.5.1 (x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 14:55:32 +1100 Message-ID: <87y49p7jnv.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 16031103-0025-0000-0000-00002260689C X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 03:55:42 -0000 Stewart Smith writes: > Patrick Williams writes: >> On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 02:30:51PM +1030, Joel Stanley wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 9:00 AM, OpenBMC Patches >>> wrote: >>> > From: Patrick Williams >>> > >>> > There was a previous proposal to consider autotools (see >>> > openbmc/ipmi-fru-parser#7). This is an alternative implementation >>> > using cmake. >>> >>> I'm not a fan of autotools; I have not chosen to use it on small >>> projects in the past. >>> >>> That said, I have stopped working on projects due to cmake's >>> downsides. It's overly complex, and no clear way to implement rules, >>> making it hard for newbies and experienced developers alike. >> >> Can you elaborate on this? I honestly don't have much experience with >> CMake but from the little I have played with it it seems 5x easier than >> makefiles (which autotools still use via Makefile.am). > > Some getting started bits are easier in CMake, that's true. But CMake > misses a few important things: Tridge on CMake: https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/2010-February/069670.html -- Stewart Smith OPAL Architect, IBM.