Re: [CMake] relative paths for visual studio generators?

I'm far from a CMake expert, so maybe this answer is not optimal. To support relative path for dependencies I have patched the method: cmGlobalVisualStudio71Generator::WriteProject Here is the modified version (sorry I don't know how to do a patch file, fortunately it is a small method):

Re: [CMake] Suggestion for CMake platform/compiler detection

Brandon J. Van Every wrote: People who feel neutral about Autoconf, or who are in fact pleased with it, aren't going to up and do anything for Windows anytime soon. For those people, it will take a *long* time for migrations to happen via CMake. I do not agree, yes it will take time but if y

[CMake] Question about linking lilbraries

Hi, all! In our project we have 3 configuration: Debug, Release, ReleaseWithDebugInfo For every configuration we have individual set of libraries I can use TARGET_LINK_LIBRARIES with corresponding flags gor configuration Debug or Release, but what about ReleaseWithDebug

[CMake] Change in variable resolution?

Hello all, I have been using CMake 2.4.3 until today. Now I wanted to switch to CMake 2.4.4 or the CVS-version. After playing around with the CVS-version, I have observed a change in the resolution of CMake variables. I have been using two methods of denoting CMake variables: 1) @CMAKE_VARIA

Re: [CMake] Change in variable resolution?

wedekind wrote: Hello all, I have been using CMake 2.4.3 until today. Now I wanted to switch to CMake 2.4.4 or the CVS-version. After playing around with the CVS-version, I have observed a change in the resolution of CMake variables. I have been using two methods of denoting CMake variables: 1)

Re: [CMake] Change in variable resolution?

Bill Hoffman wrote: First, there is no 2.4.4 yet. Second, this does seem to be a bug, thanks for reporting it. I will try to figure out what happened. -Bill This seems to be a bug fix: http://www.cmake.org/Bug/bug.php?op=show&bugid=2722 There was some discussion here: http://public.kit

AW: [CMake] Change in variable resolution?

Hello Bill, thanks for your fast reply. >First, there is no 2.4.4 yet. I know that there is no official 2.4.4 yet. But there is (at least one) CMake command described on the cmake documentation site, that is not supported by the last stable release (2.4.3). I have used this (officially unsupport

AW: [CMake] Change in variable resolution?

Hello Bill, >This seems to be a bug fix: > >http://www.cmake.org/Bug/bug.php?op=show&bugid=2722 >There was some discussion here: > >http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/cmake/2006-January/007942.html There seems to be an error in this bug-fix. As I understand it, the intent was to still allow reso

[CMake] [newbie] Do I have to list all .cpp files explicitly?

Hi, I'm hoping to find a tool that, given a top-level C++ file, will find and compile and its dependencies (including headers and source files). I'm brand new to CMake and wondering if I have to list all .cpp files explicitly? I have simplified the CMake "hello world" example to demonstrate w

Re: [CMake] [newbie] Do I have to list all .cpp files explicitly?

2006/11/17, Harlan Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Hi, I'm hoping to find a tool that, given a top-level C++ file, will find and compile and its dependencies (including headers and source files). I'm brand new to CMake and wondering if I have to list all .cpp files explicitly? You should specify

Re: [CMake] Problem with library prefix/suffix when cross compiling.

Hi, I now have a working example to cross compile the CMake example ( http://www.cmake.org/HTML/Examples.html) with MINGW under linux for windows. Unfortunately it requires a "small" replace in a build.make file, I wasn't able to figure it out completely in CMake. To get the example working I ch

Re: [CMake] ZERO_CHECK

On 11/16/06, Bill Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Phillip Hellewell wrote: > What is ZERO_CHECK and why do I need it? Why does this project show > up when I use VS8 generator? How come every time I try to run it > thinks ZERO_CHECK is out of date and needs to be rebuilt? > > Thanks, > Phill

Re[2]: [CMake] relative paths for visual studio generators?

Hello Sylvain,        I have managed to do it with        CMAKE_USE_RELATIVE_PATHS and CMAKE_SUPPRESS_REGENERATION        cmake switches.. :)        Thanks anyways for the reply! Friday, November 17, 2006, 10:41:44 AM, you wrote: > I'm far from a CMake expert, so maybe this answe

[CMake] .txt file extension

Hey, I'm ramping up on CMake, and love several things about it. The CMakeLists.txt .txt file extension is driving me nuts, though. Mostly, because I'd like to syntax highlight it, but can't distinguish it from other file types. I'm going to modify my local source for this. Has anyone thought of

Re: [CMake] .txt file extension

On Friday 17 November 2006 12:39, Vincent Scheib wrote: > The CMakeLists.txt .txt file extension is driving me nuts, though. > Mostly, because I'd like to syntax highlight it, but can't distinguish > it from other file types. The .txt does seem misleading to me. Maybe we could call the files just

Re: [CMake] .txt file extension

Warren Turkal wrote: On Friday 17 November 2006 12:39, Vincent Scheib wrote: The CMakeLists.txt .txt file extension is driving me nuts, though. Mostly, because I'd like to syntax highlight it, but can't distinguish it from other file types. The .txt does seem misleading to me. Maybe we

Re: [CMake] .txt file extension

On Friday 17 November 2006 13:02, Bill Hoffman wrote: > OK, this was my fault, I hate getting a file on windows, that when you > click on it, no good default comes up. > So, it is a text file, and I used .txt. I don't think it is something > that we should change at this point, too > many project

Re: AW: [CMake] Change in variable resolution?

wedekind wrote: Hello Bill, This seems to be a bug fix: http://www.cmake.org/Bug/bug.php?op=show&bugid=2722 There was some discussion here: http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/cmake/2006-January/007942.html There seems to be an error in this bug-fix. As I understand it, the intent w

Re: [CMake] Suggestion for CMake platform/compiler detection

Bill Hoffman wrote: Brandon J. Van Every wrote: Bill Hoffman wrote: MSYS uses a version of bash, and MinGW uses the windows shell, and cygwin uses bash, zsh, or some other more like unix. Pedantically: MinGW doesn't "use" a shell. MinGW is a compiler that could be run under straight Windo

Re: [CMake] .txt file extension

Hi, Von: Warren Turkal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ... > > I use emacs > > and have no problem with syntax highlighting. There are modes for vim > > and emacs that work fine. What > > editor are you having trouble with? > > I am not having problems with syntax highlighting. It just seems unclean > t

Re: [CMake] .txt file extension

On 11/17/06, Vincent Scheib <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The CMakeLists.txt .txt file extension is driving me nuts, though. Mostly, because I'd like to syntax highlight it, but can't distinguish it from other file types. Isn't that an issue with how the editor you're using matches syntaxes to fil

Re: [CMake] Suggestion for CMake platform/compiler detection

Length warning! As a preamble, I want to make it clear that I'm not a proponent of Stop Energy. http://www.userland.com/whatIsStopEnergy I throw cold water at people, then tell them to knock themselves out with whatever they feel needs doing. Tanguy Krotoff wrote: Brandon J. Van Every wrote

Re: [CMake] Suggestion for CMake platform/compiler detection

On 2006-11-17 16:56-0800 Brandon J. Van Every wrote: When projects are that expensive to re-architect, people don't just "switch." They carefully consider their options only when they're in a lot of pain. So if a Linux-loving Autoconfer's build is working more or less ok, they ain't fixin' wha

Re: [CMake] Suggestion for CMake platform/compiler detection

Alan W. Irwin wrote: [The Autotools] help was much appreciated, but still the necessity for that help and the other factors I have mentioned made me uneasy about continuing to depend on autotools. Yes, the Autotools have many liabilities. Most notably, they are built in layers, all with diffe