Re: [Chicken-hackers] anybody good with cmake?

[felix winkelmann]

On 8/14/07, Brandon Van Every <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> If you choose to use bleeding edge ASM capabilities from CMake CVS
> head, and it proves to be difficult, that's to be expected.  This is
> open source.  2 of the best core CMake developers have already
> extended you help on this.  Either step up to the plate and slug
> through the CVS head problems like a good open source developer, or
> accept that the bleeding edge of CMake is not for you.
>

I appreciate the help of the cmake folks, but note that both suggestions
do currently not work, and this time it wasn't my fault. I want relatively
simple things and have the feeling that I have to write gobs of CMake
definitions to make them work.

> ADD_CUSTOM_COMMAND is the safe, well-tested, mainstream, typical way
> of handling this kind of problem.  Chicken is the most extensively
> commented example available of how to drive a non-C/C++ language with
> ADD_CUSTOM_COMMAND.  If you don't understand this approach, then you
> haven't even tried.  I'm happy to answer questions but really, it's
> all based on build rituals you're intimately familiar with.

Hm. Somehow it never works when I try this. Should ADD_CUSTOM_COMMAND
output an .o file? How do I add this to the chicken libraries? I always have
to do some workaround it seems.

So, it would be more helpful if you would fix the CMake build instead
of spending
the time writing these mails. I'm a bit tired of getting told that apparently
I'm too thick for these things...

>
> I'll refrain from addressing greater political issues for now.  I
> think this kind of frustration is predictable when a community doesn't
> put its full energies behind 1 build system.

Even when it's buggy?

>
> I agree that CMake documentation is substandard.  It needs a major
> infrastructural overhaul.  That's only going to happen if I personally
> spearhead the effort, and I'm not prepared to do it right now.

Of course.


cheers,
felix