I know I'm getting old but the naming of the project really irks me. If it has an "x" in front of it, I expect it needs X Windows and tosses up some kind of gui.<p>Also, being old, I don't know why anybody would want to introduce Node style dependency hell into any C++ project when "configure" exists.
<a href="https://thoughtbot.com/blog/the-magic-behind-configure-make-make-install" rel="nofollow">https://thoughtbot.com/blog/the-magic-behind-configure-make-...</a>
> there are already many powerful C/C++ package managers, the most well-known and most used are: vcpkg, conan, conda, etc. Although they are very powerful, they have a common problem: The build system doesn't have built-in support for them.<p>CMake supports pkg-config, for what that's worth.
cmake does provide support for conan and other C/C++ ecosystem tools via plugins. It works okay.<p>I'm not sure adding a layer of Lua helps the situation.<p>cmake isn't perfect, but the best we have for now. The C++ community has unfortunately been loathe to select a language-wide build tool cum package manager. It's like the early days of Go with all the warring Go dependency systems.
I still don't understand what's wrong with writing eg spec files and letting yum/rpm manage the packages. That's what we do where I work.