[CMake] Gyp VS CMake

[Aaron_Wright at selinc.com]

Why did we skip point number 4. This was the biggest part of the CMake 
build system I made for my team. And I believe I borrowed a bit from the 
boost CMake adaption, so perhaps they have the same problem.

Instead of using a built in feature to accomplish this I have numerous 
macros and functions which define and accumulate the actual dependencies 
between libraries and executables. When I say a library depends on another 
library I need more than a build order and a link option added. I need the 
include directories too. Ever sense I started working with CMake I've been 
fighting with its "single top level view of the project." I finally got it 
so that I each library and executable knew about what it depended on and 
each could be built stand-alone. I just don't think a large project lends 
itself to the monolithic CMake approach.

Don't get me wrong, I was able to use CMake to solve its own short coming, 
so I like it, but it's almost like I needed a CMake generator. I almost 
wrote a python or perl script that would generate the CMake files, because 
of all the scripting I was doing in CMake. I don't need another scripting 
language.

---
Aaron Wright