Am 15.01.2016 um 16:19 schrieb Stephan Witt:
Am 15.01.2016 um 15:48 schrieb Peter Kümmel <syntheti...@gmx.net>:
Am 15.01.2016 um 15:01 schrieb Stephan Witt:
Am 15.01.2016 um 14:41 schrieb Peter Kümmel <syntheti...@gmx.net>:
Am 14.01.2016 um 23:32 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:
Am 14.01.2016 um 21:22 schrieb Georg Baum:
So I still think that creating a new git branch and copying the files
from the tar there is the quickest and also safest way - no need to
fiddle around with any path.
Here I strongly disagree. By doing this, you have no control over the
information from the previous builds that is in the cmake cache.
Therefore it is never sure whether such a build is reproducible (e.g. if
you re-used the directory to build from git again).
I don't understand. It is up to me to decide which branch becomes
active. All other branches and their files are invisible for the
compiler and also for CMake. As I understood it CMake is only necessary
to tell the compiler where and in which order to take the files from. I
built this way now for about 2 years. Why do I need to take care of the
CMake cache? From where do you know that building from a git folder is
not reproducible? If that would be the case how can people work with git
in their jobs?
I also don't see a problem to build from a clean git repository.
Only thing I would ensure is to "sit" on tagged release.
Sorry, I sent it too early…
I think there is some misunderstanding here. You’re not talking of the
same use pattern of git.
I think it should go like this:
The git-repository checkout is the source directory.
The build directory should always be outside the source directory.
A clean build starts with removing the build directory completely.
Sure, the git tree should not be touched, and the build should be in an
build directory; I never tough some does in-source builds.
Touching the git tree was the start of the discussion. See above.
Seems, I missed the point.
Stephan
