On Jan 14, 2008 12:16 PM, Bill Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Brandon Van Every wrote: > > > > > Example: I have a legacy handwritten GMake client.mk that acquires the > > build tree from CVS before the main Autoconf generated Makefile is > > run. The tree is grabbed from CVS and built by typing "make -f > > client.mk". The simplest translation to a CMake system would be > > "cmake -f client.txt". Nobody would be doing a different drill, the > > client would perceive this as nice, to not have to learn much of > > anything different. Once the build tree has been acquired, we don't > > need client.mk anymore. The equivalent of Autoconf's Makefile should > > always be CMakeLists.txt. > > > > But that is not all the patch does. > > If you do cmake -f client.txt, then every add_subdirectory and subdirs > will now look for client.txt.
I don't want that. I have trouble seeing sense in that, as I think system differences should be handled with if(APPLE) and so forth, not separate files. Martin could try to explain. > And, > cmake -f client.txt would not be the same thing as make -f client.mk, as > make -f client.mk would actually do a build. > For the cmake, one you > would have cmake -f client.txt, make (with no -f). Hm. I guess what *I* need is a way to output a different Makefile name. Oh well, back to the drawing board. I wonder what Autoconf does? Or I could translate client.mk to client.txt and make people type cmake -P client.txt. Cheers, Brandon Van Every _______________________________________________ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
