Spoke with Amine and Daniel.  I&#39;ve agreed to the lesser evil of bundling the FULL cmake.  Reasons are if we want the BE to be flexible enough to be used for more than just building ROS, we can&#39;t gimp cmake with the belief that no one will need the things we didn&#39;t include.  This is again on Windows.  I remain uninvolved with decisions about the Linux BE.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Colin Finck <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:colin@reactos.org">colin@reactos.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">Timo Kreuzer &lt;<a href="mailto:timo.kreuzer@web.de" target="_blank">timo.kreuzer@web.de</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
</div><div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
My vote on this:<br>
CMake: bundle it, optional on installation<br>
x64/arm: create individual installers<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
* CMake: bundle it, go for the (minimal) version without an installer. It&#39;s nothing &quot;exotic&quot; to install after all, just put it together with the other utilities in RosBE.<br>
<br>
* x64/arm: If build tool sizes are staying like this, create individual installers. Just for testing, I&#39;ll try an x86/x64 multilib build of Binutils and GCC though, would be nice to know how much smaller it is compared to separate x86 and x64 compilers.<br>

<br>
So in general, I agree with Timo :-)<br><font color="#888888">
<br>
<br>
- Colin</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Ros-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ros-dev@reactos.org" target="_blank">Ros-dev@reactos.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev" target="_blank">http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>