2007/5/8, Bill Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Eric Noulard wrote:
> Personnally I don't want to pay for something I don't need or simply
> wan't.
>
> CMake is a perfect tool on its own
> As far as I know CPack and CTest depends on CMake but why
> should CMake depends on CPack or CTest?
[...]
>
> I know that CMake/CTest/CPack are provided together but I don't
> think it would be a good design choice to enforce dependency unless
> it is really needed.
It is more a matter of convenience, and versions.  It is painful enough
to maintain binaries for all the platforms we do, but to have to do it
for three separate tools would be worst.

I can largely understand that :))
I wasn't saying that you should not build and package
CMake/CTest/CPack together but only being careful about
dependencies, like mandatory checking for CPack
inside the CMake source code.

Maybe at some point in the
future it might be an install option, but we are talking about a pretty
small delta to the install size for CMake.

Yes I know and you are damn right for install options
you will see when the real need comes.

What I mean is if the executables cannot work without one another
then maybe you should built a single executable with additionnal options
to select the "tool" may be just like valgrind does with --tool
(=memcheck, =callgrind, =massif...).

This way you don't EVEN NEED to check for your sibling executable :))

--
Erk
_______________________________________________
CMake mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake

Reply via email to