Re: cmake/build.mk?

[Jason Bacon <outpaddling%yahoo.com@localhost>]

On 4/29/21 3:06 AM, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 08:05:24AM +0000, nia wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 09:14:28PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 08:24:43PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 08:17:18PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > > > > I see that meson has a build.mk that defines the necessary override
> > > > > targets. cmake on the other hand is in mk with a USE_CMAKE setting
> > > > > (that mostly pulls in the dependency and some cmake default args).
> > > > I see cmake more as alternative to autoconf, so having it behave like
> > > > GNU_CONFIGURE sounds more sensible to me.
> > > meson is also an alternative to autoconf...
> > >   Thomas
> > I assumed they were handled differently because pkgsrc assumes
> > a "configure" implementation uses make, while meson uses ninja.
> I'd like to (optionally) use ninja with cmake as well...
>   Thomas
You might have to.  I've run into cmake builds that don't work with make 
and others that don't work with ninja.  FYI, ninja is the default on 

FreeBSD, but it also offers USES=cmake:noninja for dodging ninja 
breakage.  A quick grep shows 1991 ports using cmake and 100 using :noninja.

My only desire regarding cmake would be increasing control over builds.  
I was looking into this a couple years ago, but it got trumped by other 
priorities.  Looks like not much has changed since then.

Cheers,

    JB