SCons vs Automake

Struggling to choose between SCons and Automake? Both products offer unique advantages, making it a tough decision.

SCons is a Development solution with tags like build, automation, python.

It boasts features such as Dependency tracking, Parallel builds, Caching, Extensible with Python scripts, Cross-platform and pros including Fast incremental builds, Easily customizable, Good dependency management, Built-in support for many languages.

On the other hand, Automake is a Development product tagged with make, automake, build, gnu.

Its standout features include Automatically generates Makefile.am files from Makefile.in files, Supports automatic dependency tracking and parallel builds, Integrates with Autoconf to provide a full build environment, Supports various languages like C, C++, Fortran, Java, Objective-C, Handles library dependencies and subdirectories seamlessly, Allows overriding defaults and customization through config files, and it shines with pros like Saves time by automating Makefile creation, Promotes standardization and best practices for builds, Simplifies build configuration for large, complex projects, Easy to integrate with build tools like Autoconf and Libtool, Actively maintained and well-documented.

Feature	SCons	Automake
Overall Score	N/A	N/A
Primary Category	Development	Development

Product Overview

SCons

Description: SCons is an open source software construction tool that is used to build software applications and libraries. It is written in Python and uses Python scripts for its configuration files making it easy to customize and extend.

Automake

Description: Automake is a tool for automatically generating Makefile.am files that comply with the GNU coding standards. It simplifies the creation and maintenance of Makefiles for complex software projects.

Key Features Comparison

SCons Features

• Dependency tracking
• Parallel builds
• Caching
• Extensible with Python scripts
• Cross-platform

Automake Features

• Automatically generates Makefile.am files from Makefile.in files
• Supports automatic dependency tracking and parallel builds
• Integrates with Autoconf to provide a full build environment
• Supports various languages like C, C++, Fortran, Java, Objective-C
• Handles library dependencies and subdirectories seamlessly
• Allows overriding defaults and customization through config files

Pros & Cons Analysis

SCons

Pros

• Fast incremental builds
• Easily customizable
• Good dependency management
• Built-in support for many languages

Cons

• Steep learning curve
• Limited adoption compared to Make/CMake
• Less flexible than general purpose build tools like Make

Automake

Pros

• Saves time by automating Makefile creation
• Promotes standardization and best practices for builds
• Simplifies build configuration for large, complex projects
• Easy to integrate with build tools like Autoconf and Libtool
• Actively maintained and well-documented

Cons

• Yet another build tool to learn
• Limited flexibility compared to handwritten Makefiles
• Not as feature-rich as some alternatives like CMake
• Requires GNU build tools and may not work on all platforms
• Can have a steep learning curve

Pricing Comparison

SCons

• Open Source

Automake

• Open Source