openexr-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Openexr-devel] looking for a working 2.0.1 Windows build


From: Nick
Subject: Re: [Openexr-devel] looking for a working 2.0.1 Windows build
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 18:41:33 -0700

LOL, CMake is the only one that is halfway decent, and easily universally available, and not perennially abandoned by its developer :)

> From: address@hidden
> Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 10:15:08 -0700
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [Openexr-devel] looking for a working 2.0.1 Windows build
>
> Do any of the people complaining about CMake have a suggestion for a better cross-platform build system that (a) isn't worse on the things that CMake does relatively well, and (b) isn't so rare or obscure that nobody will have it on their system or be able to install it or that it's in danger of its development team stopping or being unresponsive?
>
>
>
> On Jun 17, 2014, at 8:14 AM, Thorsten Kaufmann <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > Sorry this was meant for the list not Michel only :)
> >
> > From my experience i wholeheartedly agree. Maybe this mainly a windows problem too? But no matter what I tried to build using CMAKE ended up in a frustrating disaster heh
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Thorsten
> >
> >
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden Im Auftrag von Michel Lerenard
> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. Juni 2014 09:31
> > An: address@hidden
> > Betreff: Re: [Openexr-devel] looking for a working 2.0.1 Windows build
> >
> > On 06/17/2014 07:35 AM, Piotr Stanczyk wrote:
> >>
> >> I am hoping that CMake can serve our needs well.
> > Somehow I disagree.
> >
> > I've been using and compiling free libraries using cmake for a while now, and I have to say that's the worst build system I've ever seen. Of all the libraries I've compiled, OpenEXR is the only one that I could build with a few tweaks only. For most of the others, it's easier and faster to create visual solutions from scratch than having Cmake correctly generating the projects.
> >
> > I'm quite sure that it would not be more difficult to maintain Visual Solution than updating the CMake config files (that's what I with other libraries), and far much easier for people to use them. For my point of view (user building third party libraries with it), Cmake seems so complicated, generates so many files and uses so many variables that it's hard to believe it's easy for library maintainers to update it.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Openexr-devel mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel
> > Thorsten Kaufmann
> > Production Pipeline Architect
> > ____________________________________
> >
> > Mackevision Medien Design GmbH
> > Forststraße 7
> > D-70174 Stuttgart
> >
> > T T +49 711 93 30 48 606
> > F +49 711 93 30 48 90
> > M +49 151 19 55 55 02
> >
> > address@hidden
> > www.mackevision.de
> >
> > Geschäftsführer: Armin Pohl, Joachim Lincke, Karin Suttheimer
> > HRB 243735 Amtsgericht Stuttgart
> > _______________________________________________
> > Openexr-devel mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel
>
> --
> Larry Gritz
> address@hidden
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openexr-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]