From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: DervishD Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] util-linux-ng 2.13-rc1 Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 08:41:53 +0200 Message-ID: <20070706064153.GA25161@DervishD> References: <8CYT9-4Ou-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <8Dh9k-8lT-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <8DtDz-3xC-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <20070705192002.GB11204@DervishD> <87vecyeg5y.fsf@hades.wkstn.nix> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@gmx.de>, Karel Zak , List util-linux-ng , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Nix Return-path: Received: from smtp01.cdmon.com ([86.109.99.230]:49420 "EHLO smtp01.cdmon.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758239AbXGFGl6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jul 2007 02:41:58 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87vecyeg5y.fsf@hades.wkstn.nix> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Hi Nix :) * Nix dixit: > On 5 Jul 2007, DervishD spake thusly: > >> Configuring the build of an autotools program is harder than nesce= nsary; > >> if it used a config file, you could easily save it somewhere while= adding > >> comments on how and why you did *that* choice, and you could possi= bly > >> use a set of default configs which you'd just include. > > > > Looks like CMake... >=20 > That's cool :) thanks to KDE using it everyone's autobuilders are hav= ing > to adapt to cmake anyway, and it's not hard and you only have to do i= t > once. I really like the spirit of CMake. Of course, it adds a dependency, but IMHO is much safer to depend on CMake being installed (or Perl, for that matter) than to depend on a shell. Every shell out there seems to do things on its own, and apart from dash, which is more or less standard, the rest of shells do actually violate the standard one way o= r another (in fact, configure script include workarounds for at least Bas= h and Zsh). > My only real grouch with cmake is that the authors have invented a > language with so bloody many capital letters in it. Looking at cmake > macros makes my eyes bleed even more badly than looking at the mass o= f > involuted nested brackets in configure.ac's, and that's a difficult > thing to do. (It's less portable than autoconf-generated configure > scripts but most of autoconf's portability tests are for long-dead > systems anyway, and as you said util-linux of all projects doesn't gi= ve > a damn. I don't really care if software isn't portable to an Interact= ive > box --- EOLed in 1992 --- or a SunOS 4.0 or HP-UX 8 box.) >=20 > There's a good reason most text is lowercase. Even Lisp moved to > lowercase a long time ago... Well, that's nothing that a good editor can't solve. You can configure VIM to lowercase your CMakelist while you edit, and uppercase it afterwards. And yes, I also thing that's a bad idea and eyes hurt badly when reading uppercase. Maybe it's not too late to change it ;) Ra=FAl N=FA=F1ez de Arenas Coronado --=20 Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to... RAmen! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel= " in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html