sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Vlad Glagolev <stealth AT sourcemage.org>
- To: SM-Discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?
- Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 00:50:48 +0300
Now when a few people overloaded my head with a question "WTF?!", I (like the
others) wanna ask
you: why cmake? Why do you add any extra software isn't really needed to
build other software?!
Another question disturbin me: why do you force devel/rc/testing versions of
the spells as they
are stable? That's not good, and that's not GNOME (Robin already argued about
it).
Neither me nor (i hope) the others wanna see their box like 00b00nt00 or
something else with a
ton of useless binaries/libraries. Nowadays, Source Mage is the only distro
where I can keep
my system as compact as possible and pretty stable. So don't break my dream.
Imho, we should
keep it as minimalistic as possible. That's why we use this system.
Before I've joined there were a lot of extra dependencies in hundreds of
spells. I fixed them
added needed flags, removed really useless dependencies, and with those
changes my system (at
that time) went down from ~470 spells to ~420. Now I have full-featured
desktop system at home
(540 spells) and at work (430 spells), and I don't have cmake.
Pango is the one of basic spells, and I don't really need cmake to build it,
really.
Thanks for understanding.
--
Dont wait to die to find paradise...
--
Cheerz,
Vlad "Stealth" Glagolev
Attachment:
pgpoUJvFhRdXX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
[SM-Discuss] Why cmake?,
Vlad Glagolev, 12/18/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?, Thomas Orgis, 12/18/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?,
David Kowis, 12/18/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?, Ivan Lezhnjov Jr., 12/19/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?, Remko van der Vossen, 12/19/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?, Ladislav Hagara, 12/19/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?, lynx, 12/19/2008
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.