Re: [cmake-developers] RFC: add version to project() call

2014-01-14 Thread Matthew Woehlke

On 2014-01-14 18:00, Alexander Neundorf wrote:

On Tuesday 14 January 2014, Matthew Woehlke wrote:

While that sounds good for 99.9% of cases, what about the case of
project A that includes project B, where B is not updated, but A decides
to start using project(...VERSION...). Now if B was using
PROJECT_VERSION internally, it is broken. (Note that I'm implying that B
is e.g. a separate repository that may not be "as easy to update/fix as
A".)


You mean
CMakeLists.txt:

project(Foo VERSION 1.2.3)



add_subdir(B)

B/CMakeLists.txt:

set(PROJECT_VERSION "4.5.6")
project(Bar)


Indeed.
In that case, PROJECT_VERSION will be unset afterwards.


Exactly. I wanted to point it out, but as that's probably unusual, I 
would be okay ignoring that case.



If it would be

B/CMakeLists.txt:


project(Bar)
set(PROJECT_VERSION "4.5.6")

everything is fine.


...until B/C/CMakeLists.txt also calls project() :-). Basically, you 
(can) get into trouble if you "update" your project to use 
project(VERSION) and also have an "external" sub-project that tries to 
use PROJECT_VERSION. However, as much as folks¹ occasionally bleat about 
this use case (having an embedded "external" project), I suspect it's 
not actually very common², and anyway there is only a problem when the 
sub-project *also* uses PROJECT_VERSION (which I suspect is also rare in 
general, and more so the intersection of the two).


Again, given the above, I've no objection to breaking that case, which 
may well only exist in the hypothetical sense with no 'in the wild' 
instances actually existing.


(¹ Myself included; this thread being a case in point.)
(² ...though I do know offhand that ParaView does so with VTK.)

--
Matthew

--

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

Re: [cmake-developers] Change default standard library implementation before used by compiler ?

2014-01-14 Thread Sean McBride
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:14:44 -0500, Jean-Christophe Fillion-Robin said:

>For both Slicer and SimpleITK, there is currently no support for the clang
>c++ standard library new implementation [1] that is now used by default on
>Maverick.
>
>It means that we currently expect our users to build the project by passing
>the flag:
> -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_INIT:STRING=-stdlib=libstdc++

That seems like a backwards approach.  Do Slicer and SimpleITK not build 
against libc++?  If not, what's the reason you want to force libstdc++?

Getting VTK and ITK to build against libc++ was not too much work, I imagine it 
would not be hard to get Slicer and SimpleITK compiling if they are not already.

Cheers,

-- 

Sean McBride, B. Eng s...@rogue-research.com
Rogue Researchwww.rogue-research.com 
Mac Software Developer  Montréal, Québec, Canada


-- 

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


Re: [cmake-developers] RFC: add version to project() call

2014-01-14 Thread Alexander Neundorf
On Tuesday 14 January 2014, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> On 2014-01-14 10:37, Brad King wrote:
> > On 01/13/2014 01:38 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> >> does this require a policy now ?
> >> 
> >> Somebody could set Foo_VERSION_MAJOR in the toplevel subdir, and have a
> >> project(Foo)
> >> call in a subdir, which would now unset Foo_VERSION_MAJOR.
> >> The same for PROJECT_VERSION_MAJOR, but this is maybe less likely.
> > 
> > I don't think project(Foo) needs to affect Foo_VERSION_* when no
> > VERSION argument is given (but should handle empty VERSION "").
> > It should still handle PROJECT_VERSION_* to ensure consistency
> > with PROJECT_NAME.  That may need a policy, but it will be tricky
> > because we need to know if the value came from a previous project()
> > call or a user set() in order to know when to trigger compatibility.
> > 
> > Perhaps "project(... VERSION ...)" can set some cmMakefile variable
> > internally that says the project knows about versions so it is okay
> > project(Foo) calls to unset them in subdirs.  Then we won't need any
> > policy because there is no change in behavior without modifying the
> > project to add at least one VERSION to a project() command.
> 
> While that sounds good for 99.9% of cases, what about the case of
> project A that includes project B, where B is not updated, but A decides
> to start using project(...VERSION...). Now if B was using
> PROJECT_VERSION internally, it is broken. (Note that I'm implying that B
> is e.g. a separate repository that may not be "as easy to update/fix as
> A".)

You mean
CMakeLists.txt:

project(Foo VERSION 1.2.3)

...

add_subdir(B)

B/CMakeLists.txt:

set(PROJECT_VERSION "4.5.6")
project(Bar)


Indeed.
In that case, PROJECT_VERSION will be unset afterwards.

If it would be 

B/CMakeLists.txt:


project(Bar)
set(PROJECT_VERSION "4.5.6")

everything is fine.

Alex
-- 

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


Re: [cmake-developers] RFC: add version to project() call

2014-01-14 Thread Alexander Neundorf
On Tuesday 14 January 2014, Brad King wrote:
> On 01/13/2014 01:38 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > does this require a policy now ?
> > 
> > Somebody could set Foo_VERSION_MAJOR in the toplevel subdir, and have a
> > project(Foo)
> > call in a subdir, which would now unset Foo_VERSION_MAJOR.
> > The same for PROJECT_VERSION_MAJOR, but this is maybe less likely.
> 
> I don't think project(Foo) needs to affect Foo_VERSION_* when no
> VERSION argument is given (but should handle empty VERSION "").
> It should still handle PROJECT_VERSION_* to ensure consistency
> with PROJECT_NAME.  That may need a policy, but it will be tricky
> because we need to know if the value came from a previous project()
> call or a user set() in order to know when to trigger compatibility.
> 
> Perhaps "project(... VERSION ...)" can set some cmMakefile variable
> internally that says the project knows about versions so it is okay
> project(Foo) calls to unset them in subdirs.  Then we won't need any
> policy because there is no change in behavior without modifying the
> project to add at least one VERSION to a project() command.

I updated the topic on stage, it basically does that now.
I haven't updated the test yet.

Alex
-- 

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


Re: [cmake-developers] Change default standard library implementation before used by compiler ?

2014-01-14 Thread Robert Maynard
You could call CMAKE_USER_MAKE_RULES_OVERRIDE before the first project
call. Than have that override file set the CXX_INIT flags based on the
compiler/OS/current flags.

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Jean-Christophe Fillion-Robin <
jchris.filli...@kitware.com> wrote:

> Hi Folks,
>
> For both Slicer and SimpleITK, there is currently no support for the clang
> c++ standard library new implementation [1] that is now used by default on
> Maverick.
>
> It means that we currently expect our users to build the project by
> passing the flag:
>  -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_INIT:STRING=-stdlib=libstdc++
> as explained in [2]
>
> To allow our users to build without explicitly passing flag, what would be
> recommended approach ?
>
> I was thinking about the following and would like to get your inputs /
> suggestions:
>
> 1) Add a compile test so that the flag could be updated before the first
> call to "project()/enable_langage()". Is this possible ?
>
> 2) Wrap the project into a superbuild structure ... that could work but
> would be a ugly hack.
>
> Thanks for your help,
> Jc
>
> [1] http://libcxx.llvm.org/
>
> [2]
> http://slicer-devel.65872.n3.nabble.com/Mavericks-with-SimpleITK-tt4030687.html
> --
> +1 919 869 8849
>
> --
>
> 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
>
-- 

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

[cmake-developers] Change default standard library implementation before used by compiler ?

2014-01-14 Thread Jean-Christophe Fillion-Robin
Hi Folks,

For both Slicer and SimpleITK, there is currently no support for the clang
c++ standard library new implementation [1] that is now used by default on
Maverick.

It means that we currently expect our users to build the project by passing
the flag:
 -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_INIT:STRING=-stdlib=libstdc++
as explained in [2]

To allow our users to build without explicitly passing flag, what would be
recommended approach ?

I was thinking about the following and would like to get your inputs /
suggestions:

1) Add a compile test so that the flag could be updated before the first
call to "project()/enable_langage()". Is this possible ?

2) Wrap the project into a superbuild structure ... that could work but
would be a ugly hack.

Thanks for your help,
Jc

[1] http://libcxx.llvm.org/

[2]
http://slicer-devel.65872.n3.nabble.com/Mavericks-with-SimpleITK-tt4030687.html
-- 
+1 919 869 8849
-- 

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

Re: [cmake-developers] RFC: add version to project() call

2014-01-14 Thread Matthew Woehlke

On 2014-01-14 14:11, Daniel Pfeifer wrote:

2014/1/14 Matthew Woehlke :

@Daniel, there is a CMAKE_PROJECT_NAME?


http://cmake.org/cmake/help/v2.8.12/cmake.html#variable:CMAKE_PROJECT_NAME
http://cmake.org/cmake/help/v2.8.12/cmake.html#variable:PROJECT_NAME

The documentation for both variables is misleading. As far as I
understand it, PROJECT_NAME is the name of the current project, while
CMAKE_PROJECT_NAME us the name of the top-level project.


Ah, I see. I always use PROJECT_NAME as a way of not repeating the name 
of the target being built (this is in a project that generally has one 
library or executable per directory, and calls project() for each of them).


In that case, I'd think CMAKE_PROJECT_VERSION would not be the correct 
thing to set (except maybe for the very first project() seen). Else I 
think we'd risk making this even more confusing ;-).


--
Matthew

--

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


Re: [cmake-developers] RFC: add version to project() call

2014-01-14 Thread Daniel Pfeifer
2014/1/14 Matthew Woehlke :
> On 2014-01-14 10:37, Brad King wrote:
>>
>> On 01/13/2014 01:38 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
>>>
>>> does this require a policy now ?
>>>
>>> Somebody could set Foo_VERSION_MAJOR in the toplevel subdir, and have a
>>> project(Foo)
>>> call in a subdir, which would now unset Foo_VERSION_MAJOR.
>>> The same for PROJECT_VERSION_MAJOR, but this is maybe less likely.
>>
>>
>> I don't think project(Foo) needs to affect Foo_VERSION_* when no
>> VERSION argument is given (but should handle empty VERSION "").
>> It should still handle PROJECT_VERSION_* to ensure consistency
>> with PROJECT_NAME.  That may need a policy, but it will be tricky
>> because we need to know if the value came from a previous project()
>> call or a user set() in order to know when to trigger compatibility.
>>
>> Perhaps "project(... VERSION ...)" can set some cmMakefile variable
>> internally that says the project knows about versions so it is okay
>> project(Foo) calls to unset them in subdirs.  Then we won't need any
>> policy because there is no change in behavior without modifying the
>> project to add at least one VERSION to a project() command.
>
>
> While that sounds good for 99.9% of cases, what about the case of project A
> that includes project B, where B is not updated, but A decides to start
> using project(...VERSION...). Now if B was using PROJECT_VERSION internally,
> it is broken. (Note that I'm implying that B is e.g. a separate repository
> that may not be "as easy to update/fix as A".)
>
> That's an edge case though... not sure it's worth worrying about, but just
> saying...
>
> @Daniel, there is a CMAKE_PROJECT_NAME? I've always used just
> PROJECT_NAME... (Is PROJECT_NAME deprecated?) Anyway, while *hopefully* no
> one is setting e.g. CMAKE_PROJECT_VERSION there's still risk that they are.

http://cmake.org/cmake/help/v2.8.12/cmake.html#variable:CMAKE_PROJECT_NAME
http://cmake.org/cmake/help/v2.8.12/cmake.html#variable:PROJECT_NAME

The documentation for both variables is misleading. As far as I
understand it, PROJECT_NAME is the name of the current project, while
CMAKE_PROJECT_NAME us the name of the top-level project.
This comes in handy when projects are added with 'add_subdirectory()'.
If NOT CMAKE_PROJECT_NAME STREQUAL PROJECT_NAME, the current project
is not built independently.
-- 

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


Re: [cmake-developers] RFC: add version to project() call

2014-01-14 Thread Matthew Woehlke

On 2014-01-14 10:37, Brad King wrote:

On 01/13/2014 01:38 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote:

does this require a policy now ?

Somebody could set Foo_VERSION_MAJOR in the toplevel subdir, and have a
project(Foo)
call in a subdir, which would now unset Foo_VERSION_MAJOR.
The same for PROJECT_VERSION_MAJOR, but this is maybe less likely.


I don't think project(Foo) needs to affect Foo_VERSION_* when no
VERSION argument is given (but should handle empty VERSION "").
It should still handle PROJECT_VERSION_* to ensure consistency
with PROJECT_NAME.  That may need a policy, but it will be tricky
because we need to know if the value came from a previous project()
call or a user set() in order to know when to trigger compatibility.

Perhaps "project(... VERSION ...)" can set some cmMakefile variable
internally that says the project knows about versions so it is okay
project(Foo) calls to unset them in subdirs.  Then we won't need any
policy because there is no change in behavior without modifying the
project to add at least one VERSION to a project() command.


While that sounds good for 99.9% of cases, what about the case of 
project A that includes project B, where B is not updated, but A decides 
to start using project(...VERSION...). Now if B was using 
PROJECT_VERSION internally, it is broken. (Note that I'm implying that B 
is e.g. a separate repository that may not be "as easy to update/fix as A".)


That's an edge case though... not sure it's worth worrying about, but 
just saying...


@Daniel, there is a CMAKE_PROJECT_NAME? I've always used just 
PROJECT_NAME... (Is PROJECT_NAME deprecated?) Anyway, while *hopefully* 
no one is setting e.g. CMAKE_PROJECT_VERSION there's still risk that 
they are.


--
Matthew

--

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


Re: [cmake-developers] RFC: add version to project() call

2014-01-14 Thread Daniel Pfeifer
2014/1/14 Brad King :
> On 01/13/2014 01:38 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
>> does this require a policy now ?
>>
>> Somebody could set Foo_VERSION_MAJOR in the toplevel subdir, and have a
>> project(Foo)
>> call in a subdir, which would now unset Foo_VERSION_MAJOR.
>> The same for PROJECT_VERSION_MAJOR, but this is maybe less likely.
>
> I don't think project(Foo) needs to affect Foo_VERSION_* when no
> VERSION argument is given (but should handle empty VERSION "").
> It should still handle PROJECT_VERSION_* to ensure consistency
> with PROJECT_NAME.

What about CMAKE_PROJECT_VERSION_* for consistency with CMAKE_PROJECT_NAME?

>  That may need a policy, but it will be tricky
> because we need to know if the value came from a previous project()
> call or a user set() in order to know when to trigger compatibility.
>
> Perhaps "project(... VERSION ...)" can set some cmMakefile variable
> internally that says the project knows about versions so it is okay
> project(Foo) calls to unset them in subdirs.  Then we won't need any
> policy because there is no change in behavior without modifying the
> project to add at least one VERSION to a project() command.
-- 

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


Re: [cmake-developers] RFC/Review Request: Topic GNUInstallDirs_debian-multiarch-fix

2014-01-14 Thread Daniele E. Domenichelli
On 13/01/14 16:51, Brad King wrote:
> On 01/13/2014 10:23 AM, Daniele E. Domenichelli wrote:
>> Can I store CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX in an internal cached variable, check
>> if it was changed since last run (i.e. CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX_OLD !=
>> CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX), check if the value is the default one, and
>> eventually force-set it to the new default?
> 
> Yes, that should work.  Call it something internal-sounding
> like __LAST_CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX.

Updated the topic to behave in this way. Can you please review it again?

By the way, this is not the first time that I need to know if the value
of a cached variable changed since the previous run, maybe it could be
useful to have a standard way to do it...


Cheers,
 Daniele

-- 

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


[cmake-developers] [CMake 0014698]: CMP0043 warning for COMPILE_DEFINITIONS without any suffix

2014-01-14 Thread Mantis Bug Tracker

The following issue has been SUBMITTED. 
== 
http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=14698 
== 
Reported By:Peter Kuemmel
Assigned To:
== 
Project:CMake
Issue ID:   14698
Category:   CMake
Reproducibility:always
Severity:   minor
Priority:   normal
Status: new
== 
Date Submitted: 2014-01-14 17:27 CET
Last Modified:  2014-01-14 17:27 CET
== 
Summary:CMP0043 warning for COMPILE_DEFINITIONS without any
suffix
Description: 
CMake also warns about CMP0043 when only "COMPILE_DEFINITIONS" is used without
any suffix.
== 

Issue History 
Date ModifiedUsername   FieldChange   
== 
2014-01-14 17:27 Peter Kuemmel  New Issue
==

-- 

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


Re: [cmake-developers] RFC: add version to project() call

2014-01-14 Thread Brad King
On 01/13/2014 01:38 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> does this require a policy now ?
> 
> Somebody could set Foo_VERSION_MAJOR in the toplevel subdir, and have a 
> project(Foo)
> call in a subdir, which would now unset Foo_VERSION_MAJOR.
> The same for PROJECT_VERSION_MAJOR, but this is maybe less likely.

I don't think project(Foo) needs to affect Foo_VERSION_* when no
VERSION argument is given (but should handle empty VERSION "").
It should still handle PROJECT_VERSION_* to ensure consistency
with PROJECT_NAME.  That may need a policy, but it will be tricky
because we need to know if the value came from a previous project()
call or a user set() in order to know when to trigger compatibility.

Perhaps "project(... VERSION ...)" can set some cmMakefile variable
internally that says the project knows about versions so it is okay
project(Foo) calls to unset them in subdirs.  Then we won't need any
policy because there is no change in behavior without modifying the
project to add at least one VERSION to a project() command.

-Brad
-- 

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


[cmake-developers] [CMake 0014697]: CMake does not add files to depend.make which are referenced by #include but not present on disk

2014-01-14 Thread Mantis Bug Tracker

The following issue has been SUBMITTED. 
== 
http://www.cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=14697 
== 
Reported By:Christian Meyer
Assigned To:
== 
Project:CMake
Issue ID:   14697
Category:   CMake
Reproducibility:always
Severity:   major
Priority:   normal
Status: new
== 
Date Submitted: 2014-01-14 08:07 EST
Last Modified:  2014-01-14 08:07 EST
== 
Summary:CMake does not add files to depend.make which are
referenced by #include but not present on disk
Description: 
I added a bash script which should reproduce the problem on any system with a
working cmake installation when generating Makefiles.

It boils down to CMake omitting to add a #included file to the depend.make if
that include is not present on the hard drive at build time. Unfortunately it
does not fix this when that file is added afterwards.

Use Case: 
1. User commits new source to a repository but omits a header file (fairly
common)
2. Build server initiates an incremental build which fails because the header
file is missing
3. User commits the missing header
4. Build server starts incremental build, build succeeds
5. User modifies the header
6. Expected: Build server rebuilds the source file which included the header;
Actual: Build server does nothing



Steps to Reproduce: 
#!/bin/bash

# Test script to check for correct dependency updating in cmake when users
forget to commit header files to repositories

# Returns a non-zero exit code on test failure.
cmake --version
echo "### Create a minimal test project"
echo "#include \"main.h\"" > main.cpp
echo "int main() {return 0;}" >> main.cpp
echo "add_executable(TestApp main.cpp)" > CMakeLists.txt
echo "### Run CMake and build the project (should fail because main.h is
missing)"
cmake .
make
echo "### At this point the build fails because the header is missing"
echo "# Create the header and make (now the build should pass)"
touch main.h
make
echo "### Now the build passes normally"
echo "# Touch the header and make (now main.cpp should be rebuilt)"
touch main.h
make
echo "### The build does not recompile main.cpp even though I touched main.h"
echo "#  Display depend.make and observe that main.h is missing"
cat CMakeFiles/TestApp.dir/depend.make
grep -q main.h CMakeFiles/TestApp.dir/depend.make
TEST_PASSED=$?
# Clean up for retest
make clean
rm main.h

exit ${TEST_PASSED}

Additional Information: 
Script output on my local machine:
cmake version 2.8.7
### Create a minimal test project
### Run CMake and build the project (should fail because main.h is missing)
-- Configuring done
-- Generating done
-- Build files have been written to: /scratch/gridbox/cmake-test
[100%] Building CXX object CMakeFiles/TestApp.dir/main.cpp.o
/scratch/gridbox/cmake-test/main.cpp:1:18: fatal error: main.h: No such file or
directory
compilation terminated.
make[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/TestApp.dir/main.cpp.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/TestApp.dir/all] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2
### At this point the build fails because the header is missing
# Create the header and make (now the build should pass)
[100%] Building CXX object CMakeFiles/TestApp.dir/main.cpp.o
Linking CXX executable TestApp
[100%] Built target TestApp
### Now the build passes normally
# Touch the header and make (now main.cpp should be rebuilt)
[100%] Built target TestApp
### The build does not recompile main.cpp even tough I touched main.h
#  Display depend.make and observe that main.h is missing
# CMAKE generated file: DO NOT EDIT!
# Generated by "Unix Makefiles" Generator, CMake Version 2.8

CMakeFiles/TestApp.dir/main.cpp.o: main.cpp

== 

Issue History 
Date ModifiedUsername   FieldChange   
== 
2014-01-14 08:07 Christian MeyerNew Issue
==

-- 

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


[cmake-developers] [CMake 0014696]: CMake does not add QT_NO_DEBUG definition for RelWithDebInfo build type

2014-01-14 Thread Mantis Bug Tracker

The following issue has been SUBMITTED. 
== 
http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=14696 
== 
Reported By:Gerry Boland
Assigned To:
== 
Project:CMake
Issue ID:   14696
Category:   CMake
Reproducibility:always
Severity:   minor
Priority:   normal
Status: new
== 
Date Submitted: 2014-01-14 04:52 EST
Last Modified:  2014-01-14 04:52 EST
== 
Summary:CMake does not add QT_NO_DEBUG definition for
RelWithDebInfo build type
Description: 
In a Qt5 CMake project with code like the following:

cmake_minimum_required(VERSION 2.8.12)
find_package(Qt5Core REQUIRED)
target_link_libraries(${PROJECT_NAME} Qt5::Core)

Running with "cmake . -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=RelWithDebInfo" I see that CMake does
not define QT_NO_DEBUG.

I interpreted the distinction between the Debug build type from the
RelWithDebInfo type as being that while RelWithDebInfo also does not strip
symbols from the generated binaries, it does allow developers to disable debug
helpers like run-time asserts or expensive printing statements. So for Qt,
setting QT_NO_DEBUG for RelWithDebInfo makes sense.

I'd like to know if my interpretation is correct before proceeding with a fix,
something like adding 
set_property(TARGET ${_target} APPEND PROPERTY
COMPILE_DEFINITIONS_RELWITHDEBINFO QT_NO_DEBUG)
to Qt5CoreMacros.cmake around like 246.
== 

Issue History 
Date ModifiedUsername   FieldChange   
== 
2014-01-14 04:52 Gerry Boland   New Issue
==

-- 

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


[cmake-developers] [CMake 0014695]: CMake fails with XCode 4.6 and Qt 4 with CMAKE_OSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET

2014-01-14 Thread Mantis Bug Tracker

The following issue has been SUBMITTED. 
== 
http://www.cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=14695 
== 
Reported By:Juho Frits
Assigned To:
== 
Project:CMake
Issue ID:   14695
Category:   CMake
Reproducibility:always
Severity:   major
Priority:   normal
Status: new
== 
Date Submitted: 2014-01-14 04:40 EST
Last Modified:  2014-01-14 04:40 EST
== 
Summary:CMake fails with XCode 4.6 and Qt 4 with
CMAKE_OSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET
Description: 
CMake fails to set up CMAKE_OSX_SYSROOT when using XCode 4.6 with command line
tools installed. I have only 10.7 and 10.8 SDKs installed.

A minimal CMakeLists.txt to reproduce the issue is:

PROJECT(test)
SET(CMAKE_OSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET 10.5)
FIND_PACKAGE(Qt4 COMPONENTS QtCore)


CMake outputs the following errors:

CMake Warning at
/opt/local/cmake/Contents/share/cmake-2.8/Modules/Platform/Darwin.cmake:145
(message):
  CMAKE_OSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET is '10.5' but the matching SDK does not exist
  at:

 
"/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Platforms/MacOSX.platform/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.5.sdk"

  Instead using SDK:

 
"/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Platforms/MacOSX.platform/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.7.sdk"

  matching the host OS X version.
Call Stack (most recent call first):
 
/opt/local/cmake/Contents/share/cmake-2.8/Modules/CMakeSystemSpecificInformation.cmake:36
(include)
  CMakeLists.txt:2 (PROJECT)

CMake Error at
/opt/local/cmake/Contents/share/cmake-2.8/Modules/Platform/Darwin.cmake:213
(message):
  CMAKE_OSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET is '10.5' but CMAKE_OSX_SYSROOT:

   ""

  is not set to a MacOSX SDK with a recognized version.  Either set
  CMAKE_OSX_SYSROOT to a valid SDK or set CMAKE_OSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET to
  empty.
Call Stack (most recent call first):
 
/opt/local/cmake/Contents/share/cmake-2.8/Modules/CMakeSystemSpecificInformation.cmake:36
(include)
  CMakeLists.txt:2 (PROJECT)

CMake Error: Internal CMake error, TryCompile configure of cmake failed


CMake 2.8.9 works fine. I haven't tested with CMake 2.8.10 or 2.8.11.
== 

Issue History 
Date ModifiedUsername   FieldChange   
== 
2014-01-14 04:40 Juho Frits New Issue
==

-- 

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