[CMake] Universal Binary with architecture-specific sources lists

Hi CMakers, I gathered that setting this: CMAKE_OSX_ARCHITECTURES=ppc;i386 enables universal binary building on MacOSX. What I could not figure out, however, is how to specify different sources list for a target, depending on the architecture being compiled. My goal is to include intel-specific

Re: [CMake] Problem added file dependency to a library.

-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alexander Neundorf Sent: 25 March 2008 16:58 To: cmake@cmake.org Subject: Re: [CMake] Problem added file dependency to a library. I'd suggest use add_custom_command(OUTPUT .../ext.obj ... ) for that

[CMake] Google Summer of Code, Cmake and PHP

Hi there, Here again is the time for a new Google Summer of Code edition and it is a good opportunity for OS projects to welcome students in their teams. This year, one of the PHP project ideas is to move its build system from autotools/Cscript to CMake, for PHP itself and for the PECL (PHP

Re: [CMake] Multi-component packaging support

On Tuesday 25 March 2008 19:54:08 Alexander Neundorf wrote: On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Timenkov Yuri wrote: Can anyone point me in right direction? Please file a feature request on the cmake bug tracker for cpack. We don't have too much feedback for cpack so this is very valuable. Ok, I'll do

Re: [CMake] Obtaining improved GNU make performance on Makefiles generated by cmake

Bill Hoffman wrote: Filipe Sousa wrote: Is that 6 minutes?? The test is to run make in a tree that has everything already built. We not trying to measure the speed of the compiler but rather the speed of make checking the depend information. Oops! There you go *cmake version

Re: [CMake] Multi-component packaging support

2008/3/26, Timenkov Yuri [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tuesday 25 March 2008 19:54:08 Alexander Neundorf wrote: On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Timenkov Yuri wrote: Can anyone point me in right direction? Please file a feature request on the cmake bug tracker for cpack. We don't have too much

Re: [CMake] Multi-component packaging support

On Wednesday 26 March 2008, Timenkov Yuri wrote: On Tuesday 25 March 2008 19:54:08 Alexander Neundorf wrote: On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Timenkov Yuri wrote: Can anyone point me in right direction? Please file a feature request on the cmake bug tracker for cpack. We don't have too much

Re: [CMake] Universal Binary with architecture-specific sources lists

On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 6:12 PM, Alexander Neundorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe using #ifdefs in the code ? This could work, indeed, but is what I was trying to avoid :-) Moreover, I'm CMake-ing an external project that I don't maintain, which contains both (non-inline) x86 ATT style

Re: [CMake] [CPack.cmake] take into account CPACK_PACKAGE_VERSION_xxxxxxxxx only once

On Friday 21 March 2008, Jerome Arbez-Gindre wrote: Hi, I have noticed that the overwriting of CPACK_PACKAGE_VERSION have no impact on the .deb packages file name (and have impact on sources packages). I propose to use the CPACK_PACKAGE_VERSION_x macros only once to set (if not set

[CMake] Linux 64 bit woes

I'm compiling under Ubuntu and want to generate 64 bit code. Is there a way to get cmake to generate the correct settings in the Makefile ? I tried adding -m64 (and -march=x86-64) but the __x86_64__ define does not seem to be set. I.e. when using FD_SET it gets the #define from

Re: [CMake] Making FindBoost prefer Boost_ROOT

On 26.03.08 17:25:58, Matthew Woehlke wrote: Matthew Woehlke wrote: In order to get my Boost_ROOT honored rather than the system boost in /usr/include (which is too old), I had to make the following changes to FindBoost.cmake (this is from kdevplatform, but I've had to copy the module to