Re: A Gtk's build system ?

I should hope not.

Autotools is indeed the worst possible solution, except for all the
others.  (With apologies to Churchill.)  But it exists and it is a
known quantity.

It solves problems like generation of tar balls, checking that the tar
balls actually
work, running test suites, checking translation completeness, handles cross-
compilation (to a point), multiple architectures, parallel builds,
etc.  Hard stuff.

(It also handles hardware last observed in the late 70s, but you
aren't harmed by

I really do not see a need to sink time into replacing all that.
Especially not if
the simplification consists of using the ostrich approach -- "*I*
don't have that
problem so it is not important."

Re your specific concerns: linux, osx, win32 all have the unix tools;
there ought
to be a macro provided to find glib-compile-resources; with counceling you will
get over the ugliness.


On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Victor Aurélio Santos
<victoraur santos gmail com> wrote:
Hi folks,

Is there a plan to write a new build system or use another existing
build system for Gtk instead of Autotools ?

I ask this because autotools is something "not good enough" for me.
It's syntax is ugly and bad to remember, the platform that will run
autotools requires a UNIX tool-set (sh, make, etc...), there's no
support to glib's features like resources the developer have manually
find the glib-compile-resources executable and write rules to build
the resources, and so on.

I also think that Gtk should have something "Gtk's build system", Like
Qt's qmake.

If not, do anyone know if GNOME plan this ?
Note that jhbuild is not a build system, it's more a "build bot".

Thanks, I'll be happy to hear your plans and pros/cons of move to
another build system.
Victor Aurélio Santos
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list gnome org

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]