From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: John Smith <witchspace81@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 12:55:52 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/2.6.39-gentoo; KDE/4.6.2; x86_64; ; )
References: <CAJNQ0stvozeQAVFkduY7Ph5EXy8ayYwiu4T+6Oz1RwjgiDnBeA@mail.gmail.com>
	<201107021050.10563.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CAJNQ0svyJcob=gfWfi7YuLWTdbLokrFyDGnMFtYLRk_29r-DZw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJNQ0svyJcob=gfWfi7YuLWTdbLokrFyDGnMFtYLRk_29r-DZw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201107021255.54088.luke@dashjr.org>
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reconsider build system change?
Precedence: list

On Saturday, July 02, 2011 12:50:14 PM John Smith wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 02, 2011 3:29:04 AM John Smith wrote:
> > > Why again did we choose for autotools as future build system instead of
> > > cmake?
> > 
> > I don't really care much either way, but cmake doesn't follow the
> > standard build procedure (./configure && make && make install), though I
> > imagine ./configure could be emulated with some script.
> 
> It would change the sequence to
> 
> cmake . && make && make install
> 
> So a shell script named 'configure' that starts 'cmake .' is the most easy
> case :-) Probably it'd also need to pass through some command line args,
> for example --prefix.

And --datadir --mandir --randomobscurecrap CXXFLAGS=-O9, etc
Don't forget --help listing all the useful options... that's the big thing I 
miss with CMake-stuff.