> Here in Fedora, we actually *want* CMake to find system libraries. The > situation on Windows is of course different, and third-party packages for > GNU/Linux may or may not want to use the system libraries, but our > distribution packages definitely want to use them.
... and if you cross-compile, you definetly don't want to your build system to stick its nose into your system librararies on any platform. Therefore I see build automation and packaging as orthogonal processes. IMO it lowers the usage complexity and leaves more room for flexibility when being kept separate. The package system would be responsible to resolve dependencies and could produce files that the build automation system would consume. I kind of like the idea behind Conan which does only package management, dependency resolution and provides simple-enough generators for all kinds of build automation system. The discussion about build systems reminds me a bit of a religious war. I made my peace with CMake and use it only when being paid for. It allows me to use the browser more often and to find obscure stuff on the internet. It's an expensive tool. After work I want to get my stuff done with low investment, hence I often use Qbs ;-) Richard _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development