On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Sergei Nikulov wrote:

> Could you please be more specific? I'll review cmake related issues and
> provide fixes if possible.

It doesn't really work very well that way.

1) Clearly it's been broken for ~6 months without anyone noticing. By
definition, that makes at best a second grade build option for curl. Sure I
can tell you and that problem is now fixed. But what if I break it again
tomorrow, will we notice that next year? If the cmake system actually got some
love, someone would be building it frequently and would polish it as we go.

We can see this trend is ongoing and it is not just single examples. Since the
day we added cmake to curl, the main CMakeLists.txt has been changed 44 times.
The main configure.ac was changed 231 times in the same time period. If you
read the configure.ac log, you can see how almost every one of those changes
should have a matching fix in the cmake build - but don't.

2) Our cmake build was never made to get even close to the same level of build
options that the autotool build has, which makes it inferior for anything *nix
like. Like for example: How do you build curl to use winssl or darwinssl with
cmake? Or even NSS or GnuTLS?

3) Documentation. docs/INSTALL doesn't even mention cmake or that it exists
such a build option.

4) Fragmentation. I rather have us focus on the system that in my eyes already
have "won" this battle: autotools for *win, pre-edited files for Windows.

All this summed up, I can't recommend anyone to use our cmake build.

I acknowledge that parts of this all comes down on me. I'm just not familar
nor comfortable with cmake so I keep preferring autotools and that's where I
put my focus and efforts.

-- 
  / daniel.haxx.se
-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library
Etiquette:  http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html