prorab VS utest.h

Take a look at https://github.com/cppfw/prorab it is a framework for simplifying makefiles, perhaps with it your makefiles will be shorter than CMake files.

actually, I think what might be reasonable to do is to add a check into prorab.mk that it is run with GNU make. Created issue https://github.com/cppfw/prorab/issues/69

same here, plus https://github.com/cppfw/prorab

In case you decide to go with pure GNU make I can suggest a non-recursive makefiles template library https://github.com/cppfw/prorab.

The only thing is that my own build system is GNU make-based, so it's syntax is also not easy :P.

I would say simple things are simple. CMake does use RPATH on RPATH compatible platforms, there is no need to copy DLLs. In fact, if the DLL depends on assets relative ot its location now you are just digging a deep hole for yourself for no good reason. On platforms where RPATH is not supported (Windows), you should make DLLs available via PATH, which Just Works tm. This is a shortcoming of Windows. You are free to forward your complaints to Microsoft. Regardless, here's some help with the PATH thing.

This fork of it has proper CMake integration and provides a module for automatic test discovery with the unique ability to handle DLL finding for you on Windows, which is documented here.