Hello CMake users developers,
I've been trying to build ITK on my machine, and obviously is not related to
what is built, and CMake produces
some errors at the configuration step. Perhaps someoneelse has already
encountered
similar type of problem ?
My setup:
Windows XP, ITK 3.4.0 Latest
Cem DEMiRKIR wrote:
Hello CMake users developers,
I've been trying to build ITK on my machine, and obviously is not
related to what is built, and CMake produces
some errors at the configuration step. Perhaps someoneelse
has already encountered
similar type of problem ?
My setup:
On 12/16/07, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's so great about n and no ?
Nobody has claimed that they are great...
I've never used them. Do we
really need to be polluting the interpretation of strings with these
values? What current or legacy code is using them heavily?
Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Dec 15, 2007 1:55 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've subscribed to the SCons mailing list. The SCons community has
people who got fed up with it and started their own RD. It seems
that the SCons Python 1.5 limitation is a serious one, as developers
On Dec 16, 2007 11:57 AM, David Cole [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/16/07, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's so great about n and no ?
Nobody has claimed that they are great...
I've never used them. Do we
really need to be polluting the interpretation of strings with
On Sunday 16 December 2007, Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Dec 16, 2007 11:57 AM, David Cole [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/16/07, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's so great about n and no ?
Nobody has claimed that they are great...
I've never used them. Do we
On Dec 16, 2007 1:11 PM, Gonzalo Garramuño [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brandon Van Every wrote:
Waf is the offering of a fellow
who clearly thinks OO is important in a build system for some reason.
http://code.google.com/p/waf/
A quick eval of waf
Ok, waf sucks. It can't demonstrate
On Sunday 16 December 2007, Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Dec 16, 2007 1:11 PM, Gonzalo Garramuño [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brandon Van Every wrote:
Waf is the offering of a fellow
who clearly thinks OO is important in a build system for some reason.
http://code.google.com/p/waf/
A
On Dec 16, 2007 1:44 PM, Alexander Neundorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sunday 16 December 2007, Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Dec 16, 2007 11:57 AM, David Cole [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/16/07, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's so great about n and no ?
Nobody
Alexander Neundorf wrote:
What's the purpose ?
CMake is kind-of going OO.
Meaning *what*, exactly?
Do you mean that
a) say FILE( READ ... )
will change to:
File.read() or x.read() where x is a file object?
and LIST( APPEND ... )
On Sunday 16 December 2007, you wrote:
Alexander Neundorf wrote:
What's the purpose ?
CMake is kind-of going OO.
Meaning *what*, exactly?
That the cmake objects (source files, targets, directories) are not only
influenced by global variables, but they have their own encapsulated set of
Am Freitag 14 Dezember 2007 schrieb Cristian Bidea:
Is it possible to set some C_FLAGS per target?! I know about the
global variable CMAKE_C_FLAGS but I don't need all the flags for all
the targets in the project.
You can have COMPILE_FLAGS per source file (SET_SOURCE_FILES_PROPERTIES) and
For those who love lua and want a build system there is premake
http://industriousone.com/premake
And I know that there is another build system that uses lua but I can't
find the link.
--
Filipe Sousa
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Filipe Sousa escreveu:
For those who love lua and want a build system there is premake
http://industriousone.com/premake
Look how what's on the main page (premake.sf.net):
After several years of maintaining backward compatibility Or Else, I've
decided it is time to make a break. And if I'm
I've managed to debug and correct this 'bug'. The bug report is at:
http://www.cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=6167
I really think that compiler flags should be treated like a list of
flags instead of a string because this way, IMHO, it's easier to deal
with space in flag parameters etc, to add a flag
I've been playing around with bug #5997 and I've found out the problem,
which lies in the fact that when the user sees the variable
CMAKE_(STATIC|SHARED|IMPORT)_LIBRARY_SUFFIX, he assumes that this is
something to be added to the library name (doesn't involve its
extension). But cmake assumes that
16 matches
Mail list logo
