CMake was a mistake.

@allison Hmm. What's the alternative?

@jookia @allison meson maybe

@allison Everything is better than GNU Autoconf.

@rumpelsepp @jookia @allison That’s “cmake was a mistake. Let’s create an even bigger one!”

@BartG95 @allison autotools, maybe. But there really is nothing that compares to autoconf. Nothing else does proper checks to the extend autoconf does.

@allison but it has colors

@js @jookia @allison :D make still exists though

@rumpelsepp @jookia @allison You can avoid automake. Make itself isn’t that bad. Especially when you add a build system around it like It can look as simple as

PROG = hello
SRCS = hello.c world.c


then. Zero new dependencies and still no automake hell. :)

@js @jookia @allison I know. I love make as well. Detecting library/headers might be cumbersome with plain make.

@rumpelsepp @js @allison I use CMake for portability reasons

@jookia @rumpelsepp @allison CMake is not exactly what I would use when I want portability. There's many alternative OSes on which CMake does not run at all. The regular configure + make is a better bet here:

So, yes, this can be compiled not only for MS-DOS, but also *on MS-DOS*. Try that with CMake ;).

@rumpelsepp @jookia @allison Indeed. But autoconf is not as bad as the rest of autotools.

@js @rumpelsepp @allison Mainly I think of Windows support and finding libraries. ;)