'softsim' binary only built from autotools, not from cmake

[laf0rge]

Hi!

I just tried building using cmake, and it seems in this case only the library is built, but not the 'main' executable (for use with vpcd). Is that intentional? When building with autotools it is built.

In general, it's probably a valid question whether it makes sense to maintain support for two different build systems. Maintaining two means extra effort, and has the risk of inconsistency (as we see here).

I'm not sure what kind of internal discussions you may have had, I just wanted to share my view. In my opinion, it would be fine to remove the autotools support and only support cmake - but then add the main softsim binary to cmake.

[benjaminbruun]

Very valid point. We will re-visit the top internally.

For now, we have only been met with requests for the project builds to be build as a library and not its main executeable.
But you are right, it just showcase the drawbacks of two build configuration systems... Since we forgot to have a build option for the main SoftSIM binary in CMake.