[torquedev] CMake'ing Torque

Baer, Troy tbaer at utk.edu
Wed Apr 7 08:49:36 MDT 2010

On Wed, 2010-04-07 at 15:14 +0200, Simon Toth wrote: 
> Dne 7.4.2010 04:25, Garrick Staples napsal(a):
> > I still don't understand why anyone would want to convert an actively
> > maintained autoconf setup that runs well on every platform.
> The reasons are many:
> * cmake is much easier to maintain/modify/use
> * cmake does handle most of the logic internally (no need to write
> custom scripts, and crazy make rules)
> * cmake runs pretty much everywhere (including platforms not supported
> by automake)
> * cmake is a lot faster (this does matter, only when you always compile
> from scratch)
> * cmake is just a part of a larger ecosystem (ctest,cdash,cpack)
> * cmake is used by many opensource projects and is very actively developed
> * transformation from automake to cmake is relatively painless
> (transformation scripts are avaiable)

These are all good reasons why a new project might adopt cmake.
However, TORQUE is *not* a new project, and it has an existing build
system that works.  Moreover, I would guess that most of the active
TORQUE developers are either not at all familiar with cmake or more
familiar with autoconf than cmake.  You are in effect asking the TORQUE
dev team to support an entirely new build system, with which many of
them are not familiar, in addition to the existing one.  Unless you're
volunteering to be the person who supports cmake in TORQUE, it is going
to be difficult to convince Garrick, et al. to do this IMHO.

Troy Baer, HPC System Administrator
National Institute for Computational Sciences, University of Tennessee
Phone:  865-241-4233
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://www.supercluster.org/pipermail/torquedev/attachments/20100407/5815b175/attachment.bin 

More information about the torquedev mailing list