Good point-- a non-power-user would say that the project 'failed'. But I'm kind of leaning towards the idea that if the project cannot be built from default settings, then yes, that's a problem that should be fixed by the program maintainer. If the user starts messing with settings that also causes the build to fail, shouldn't the program maintainer know about that?
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Eric Noulard <eric.noul...@gmail.com>wrote: > 2010/8/31 David Cole <david.c...@kitware.com>: > > Steps 7 thru 10 on your list may be performed by the command lines: > > cmake --build . --config Release > > cmake --build . --target install --config Release > > (equivalent to the "make; make install" parts of your example command > > line) > > Causing that to happen in delicious GUI form would be simple enough... > But > > do enough people want this...? > > Speaking for a one-line install (or buid package) command > using CMake would be nice. > > I did craft one small (not bulletproof at all) CMake script > which can be called as > > $ cmake -P CMake-autoinstall.cmake > -- Trying to autoinstall CMake version using > http://www.cmake.org/files/v2.8/cmake-2.8.2.tar.gz file... > -- Downloading... > -- Already there: nothing to do > -- Unarchiving the file > -- CMake version 2.8.2 has been unarchived in > /home/eric/CMake/tmp/cmake-2.8.2. > -- Configuring with CMake... > -- Building with cmake --build ... > -- Create package RPM with CPack... > -- CMake version 2.8.2 has been built in /home/eric/CMake/tmp/cmake-2.8.2. > -- CMake package(s) are: > /home/eric/CMake/tmp/cmake-2.8.2-build/cmake-2.8.2-Linux-x86_64.rpm > > The example file is attached. It does not handle error case very nicely > and should probable put all logs in files instead of var. > > In my case the "autoinstall" file is building an RPM and in my case I don't > want the 3) to 5) steps (default configure option should be enough). > > May be a GUI would help to chose some parameters of the "autoinstall > script" > version, CPack generator etc... but I don't think it must be the current > "cmake-gui". > > > We've talked about a "build" button in the cmake-gui before, but if > errors > > occur, you have to go elsewhere to edit code anyhow. > > If we have a build button, we have to: > > - make sure we handle voluminous output from the build tools > > - provide a way to interrupt a build in progress when the observer can't > > wait any longer... > > It shouldn't be hard, but it's not entirely trivial either. Deliciousness > > never is. > > My opinion is that "automagicall one big button (or small script) makes it > all" > shouldn't handle error case at all. > > Average user won't go and inspect why it fails. > He would probably just tell the project releaser that he/she did a poor job > and wait for him/her to fix that :-) > > > What do others think? Is this a thing you've always wanted, or something > > you've never even wished for...? > > One-line install command (or one button) > would be great but I think that if for any reason the automagic process > fails don't try to help the user with that but just point out the error > file. > > If it's a "power user" he will go back to current cmake UI. > If it's an average user he may file the error file back to the project > releaser. > > -- > Erk > Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - > http://www.april.org >
_______________________________________________ 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://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake