Re: [GD-DEVEL] GD build process

[email protected] (Pierre Joye) writes:

> hi Chris!
>
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Chris Reuter <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> I notice that there are two sets of build scripts in GD: one for GNU
>> autoconf and one for CMake.  Which of these is the preferred method for
>> building GD?
[...]

> cmake should work. Which problem(s) have you met?

Beyond having to deal with Windows, the current one is that cmake
doesn't generate gd.h from gd.h.in.

Actually, I'll look into that.  I'd like to get rid of gd.h.in in favor
of moving the generated stuff to a small corner of the program.
(Basically, provide functions that return the version info and turn the
#defines into calls to them.  This means the version will be correct in
programs using GD when the libgd shared library is updated.  It also
reduces the complexity of the build process and makes the code a little
easier to hack on.)

> We maintain both. autotools are used for linux (distros, embedded
> systems or cross compilation). Cmake is used on all supported
> platforms and windows.

Hmmm.  Would we lose anything by ditching autotools?  If cmake handles
everything, it might make sense to switch to just that, rather than
maintain two build systems.


                              --Chris


-- 
Chris Reuter                                                 http://www.blit.ca
"I pay way too much for cable, so I have to watch what's on the premium 
 channels, even if it's not very good, or else I'm just throwing money away."
               --Gregory King in alt.religion.kibology