Quote Originally Posted by Svartalf View Post
CMake's shaping up that way.


Not hard... This isn't to say that CMake's the answer for things- but it seems that it's a better one than many. And I'll challenge you to cobble together a CMake set over an autotools one for a new project. I've tried to do autotools setups- and fix them when they're broken. CMake actually seemed easier for my circumstances.
I was implying that CMake's documentation sucks
It was rather hard for me to find those out when I built my first cmake-using package.

Contrast this with ./configure --help, which is very clear to a newbie in comparison.

Of course autotools has had a decade or two of refinement.

FWIW, the easiest new-project setup for me has been qmake.

That's familiarity. autotools is a baroque answer to a problem that's just simply less screwy than imake was. More to the point, autotools is really only Linux/POSIX centric. It doesn't do well outside of that- and sadly, you DO have to deal with Windows for some things... (We won't get into the fact that autotools is two kludges on top of ./configure that were done to compensate for ./configure and Makefile deficiencies...)
Do you mean building on Windows? I'd rather avoid doing that, and just cross-compile from my linux box. So far I've managed to avoid it, and things have worked fairly well.