> There is a build system that fulfills all of Thiago's points, and it is already widely used in the Qt community: CMake.
+1, I was flabbergasted when the big objection against CMake in Qt 6 boiled down to "it does not supports all the architectures that Qt supports", so instead of contributing them - or hell, even forking CMake for those specific architectures (what are them ? I use cmake for windows, mac, linux, android, ios and the toolchain file allows for a lot of customization), what, create a new build system from scratch that splits the C++ community further ? There would be so much to gain with a better relationship between Qt and CMake. Best, ------- Jean-Michaël Celerier http://www.jcelerier.name On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:42 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kof...@chello.at> wrote: > Bogdan Vatra via Development wrote: > > Anyway IMHO is more important to have a clean, nice and easy to use > syntax > > and to be tooling friendly than 1.b. > > A custom build system is always a major pain point for distributions. A > circular dependency (what Thiago's 1.b forbids) makes it particularly > painful. How should we bootstrap new architectures or entirely new > distributions if we cannot build Qt due to the circular dependency between > Qt and its build tool? This is a showstopper. > > > GN[1] is another example of build system which didn't care too much about > > 1.a,b,c and it still used in quite big projects (e.g. chrome, fuchsia). > To > > my huge surprise, they managed to move it into a separate repo and remove > > all chromium dependencies (yep, a few months ago you had to checkout the > > entire chromium repo to build it :) ). > > GN (and its predecessor Gyp) is universally hated by distribution > packagers > for its non-standardness, weirdness, lack of documentation (including > third- > party documentation such as tutorials, an issue inherent to custom build > systems) and lack of flexibility (custom build systems are never as > powerful > as widely-used general-purpose build systems). > > QtWebEngine is a particular pain to package because it uses TWO custom > build > systems (QMake and GN). > > The Chromium mess is also what prompted Spot to write the list of FAILs > [https://spot.livejournal.com/308370.html] I have already linked to > elsewhere in this thread. > > > There is a build system that fulfills all of Thiago's points, and it is > already widely used in the Qt community: CMake. > > Kevin Kofler > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development >
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
