Re: looking for a working 2.0.1 Windows build

On 06/17/2014 05:15 PM, Halfdan Ingvarsson wrote:
> On 14-06-17 11:05 AM, Michel Lerenard wrote:
>> On 06/17/2014 04:37 PM, Nick wrote:
>>> For quite a while we maintained vcproj's for EXR - that works but 
>>> you end up needing to keep old copies of visual studio around to 
>>> make sure that it builds for 2008, 2010, 2012, ...., and then you 
>>> need to run regressions on every variant to make sure nothing broke. 
>>> It gets really time consuming. I think the same argument would hold 
>>> for xcodeproj files.
>> As far as I know, the same argument is applied when using CMake: at 
>> some point you have to compile the source and use Visual.
>> As I see it, no maintainer today is able to check all versions of the 
>> compilers, with or without CMake.
>>
>> CMake solves nothing but adds a layer of complexity because 
>> configuring is neither trivial nor intuitive.
>
> I beg to differ. It has been an absolute life-saver; especially when 
> maintaining tooling for multiple heterogeneous platforms. Earlier 
> versions were a little sketchy when it came to external dependency 
> discovery, but it's much, much better now.
>
> The fact that I've been able to move from makefiles to ninja on Linux, 
> without changing a single thing, is just icing on the cake.
>
> I just have to hold my nose when dealing with the syntax.
>
>  - ½
>
I do not say that in some (hopefully rare) cases it may be useful. The 
thing is that building on windows is a recurring issue, apparently for a 
lot of people, and for this particular platform, CMake is really a hassle.
People have already started sharing compiled files or 
projects/solutions, I think it would be quite useful to use their work 
and include it in the sources.

_______________________________________________
Openexr-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel