Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core build system (automake vs cmake)

[Kosta Zertsekel <zertsekel@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1581 bytes --]

>> On Oct 22, 2017, at 13:11, Kosta Zertsekel wrote:
>> I wonder why automake has become the build system for Bitcoin Core?
>> I mean - why not cmake which is considered better?
>> Can you please point to the relevant discussion or explanation?

> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Jeffrey Paul <jp@eeqj.com> wrote:
> Considered by whom? Automake is the standard and I prefer it as it
requires
> no additional install on most systems. For that, I consider it better.

Well, here are some quotes about CMake build tools...

JetBrains (2014)
================
Our brief research showed that CMake and ‘make’ were the most popular
cross-platform tools, having ~30% of users each, while both Autotools
and qmake had less than 7% of users. So we ended up with CMake and make.
[https://blog.jetbrains.com/clion/2014/09/cmake-vs-the-others-round-1/]

KDE Project (2006)
==================
Now the next big change is happening: KDE is leaving the aging "autotool"
build chain behind. Some developers, not only in KDE, like to nickname
the autotools as "auto-hell" because of its difficult to comprehend
architecture. So, KDE 4 will feature a completely different build system:
CMake.
[https://lwn.net/Articles/188693/]

Also, there are more advanced build systems:
============================================
 - Meson [http://mesonbuild.com]
 - Ninja [https://ninja-build.org/]

All of them (CMake, Meson, Ninja) had a goal to replace automake.
Was there any discussion about choosing the best build system for
Bitcoin Core?

Thanks,
--- Kosta Z.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5004 bytes --]