On Monday 14 January 2008 18:42, Brandon Van Every wrote: > 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
That would really be nice if we could autoconvert like that :-) > _______________________________________________ > CMake mailing list > CMake@cmake.org > http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake _______________________________________________ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
