Re: will anyone build httpd/apr with cmake on Windows?

[Jeff Trawick <tr...@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:

> Suddenly we have cmake in trunk, is there history to go this way ?
>

I don't know what you mean by "history to go this way".


>
> The primary cmake selling point is cross platform, is it tried on *nix ?


The cmake lists would have to largely duplicate the autoconf tests.  I have
no intention of messing with that, though others are of course welcome.  So
for now: httpd/apr cmake support is only for Windows.


> With Windows we have "cross VC" namely   VC6, VC8, VC9, VC10, VC11 and
> almost official  VC12.  Quite some work to get it ok on all these.


Are you talking about with the current build system for Windows or the
cmake-based build system?  What is the work you're talking about?  E.g.,
how do we get compatibility across different VC with the current build
system?  I don't see any such work committed to svn.  Or do you mean the
conversion process when you are ready to build?



>  And be aware that cmake has to be maintained, expect  more then the
> current way.
>

Time will tell...  What I see is that the cmake list represents the
"intention" of the build very concisely.  That should help with maintenance
work, especially since the Windows build system is often updated/maintained
by people who don't have the tools available.


>
> Looked at the cmake in httpd trunk and see there are still some
> limitations/issues.


lots of limitations still; it will take a while to sort those ou


> Not tried yet, figuring out how to start.  Anyone knows
> a working command line with options for building with cmake  ?
>

I will try to post or commit somewhere a script or makefile that pulls it
all together for multiple support libraries + httpd.  I have it now but not
in a form which can be shared.

Do you have a script that builds httpd and a reasonable set of support
libraries starting with a tarball/zipball?  I'm not sure what that looks
like with the current build systems.


>
> I have concerns with what looks like the complexity of just building with
> it
> but am going to hold final judgment till I've messed with it. But when I
> see
> the reply of Gregg, then I need first to study the internals of cmake to be
> sure what is going on and how to customize.
>
> Concern is also the flexibility like we have with dsp/vcxproj files.  And
> how are the Compile/Link options set, and which uses cmake ?


I don't have any experience with that yet.  I see documented options and
experiences of others using cmake with various packages, but until I
actually try it I'll just say "I don't know".


> With the GUI, I
> can set tons of options for example for optimizations, debugging, tracing
> etc. I expect that the current makefile, dsw and dsp files remain, we need
> it to debug/trace, with only cmake we miss a lot.
>
> I am a GUI guy and I state that on Windows the MS tools/stuff should be
> used
> as much as possible, like .dsp and vcproject files.  I prefer GUI, it has
> benefit in not just ease of use but also ease of finding and reading the
> errors when problems arise. You can also debug just one module so much
> easier when just rebuilding a project.
>
> Building already for about ten years with .dsp as starting point, done all
> above VC flavors. No issues, for example VC11 runs out of the box with very
> very minor adjustment, it is more that you do the needed steps in a careful
> way.
>
> So  wonder why the cmake way is started, are there issues I do not know ?
>

See my previous reply to Greg.  Feel free to correct areas of my
understanding which are not correct.

Not surprisingly, I am a script guy.  I scriptify my configure options for
Unixy-builds of httpd and support libraries and make adjustments over time
that can be found in version control.  I can't fathom going into a complex
GUI like Visual Studio every 6-12 months to try to tweak some build
setting.  I just can't remember what to do in a short amount of time.
 Product builds that use this stuff on Windows need to scriptify this too.



> I like to help to solve if there are issues. Also with ApacheLounge Forum I
> can conclude see that quite some ppl are building with minor issues.  The
> biggest flaw we had till now is with VC11 that APR/iconv was not building,
> but that we solved with a minor adjustment in the iconv make file.
>
> Regards,
>
> Steffen
>



-- 
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
http://emptyhammock.com/

Re: will anyone build httpd/apr with cmake on Windows?

[Noel Butler <no...@ausics.net>]

> 
> 
> The cmake lists would have to largely duplicate the autoconf tests.  I
> have no intention of messing with that, though others are of course
> welcome.  So for now: httpd/apr cmake support is only for Windows.
>  

and I sure as hell hope it stays that way, cmake is a complete  PITA.
I'd go as far as adding "nightmare" into that as well. It's detested by
most admins I know and even many a coder.