Brad King wrote:
> On 02/19/2014 11:00 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>> I've been waiting for master to re-open for features before working on
>> it.
>
> It is now open for post-3.0 development :)
Yep, great. Much better than waiting for weeks during RC phase. :)
>> Consider splitting the use-cases and adding both
>> {INTERFACE_,}LINK_OPTIONS and {INTERFACE_,}ARCHIVE_OPTIONS instead.
>
> Yes. That will be consistent with LINK_FLAGS/STATIC_LIBRARY_FLAGS
> but with better naming.
>
>> My preference currently is the former, and have CMake do transformation
>> if passing options to the compiler driver, assuming cmake can tell the
>> difference between that and an actual linker.
>
> Yes, that makes sense. It may take some work in the platform info
> file rule variables so that the generators can tell when they are
> invoking the linker directly v. through a compiler, and what the
> wrapper option (-Wl,) for the compiler should be.
Those are the only two issues I know of. This topic isn't a high priority
for me though. I'll be working on other topics first.
Thanks,
Steve.
--
Powered by www.kitware.com
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at:
http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ
Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
