Re: [CMake] Question about ADD_CUSTOM_COMMAND

On 02/12/2011 03:00 PM, Carminati Federico wrote: > Dear All, > I have a question about ADD_CUSTOM_COMMAND. I read in the doc > > "If DEPENDS specifies any target (created by an ADD_* command) a target-level > dependency is created to make sure the target is built before any target > using t

[CMake] Include-Dir order problem

Hi, I've got a somewhat tricky problem here with include directories. I'm building a couple of source files and for some of them I need to add an include-directory to the front of the list that cmake passes to the compiler. At the same time other source files in that directory need to not have tha

Re: [CMake] linking static vs dynamic

Yes, full paths seem to work fine for me. Many thanks for your feedback! Dominik On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Michael Hertling wrote: > On 02/12/2011 09:39 PM, Andreas Pakulat wrote: >> On 12.02.11 21:20:58, Dominik Szczerba wrote: >>> I never actually saw a solution to this problem in cmak

Re: [CMake] Ninja: a small build system closest in spirit to Make

Cool. Thanks, mm -Original Message- From: Matt Williams [mailto:li...@milliams.com] Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 5:48 PM To: Martin O'Brien Cc: CMake ML Subject: Re: [CMake] Ninja: a small build system closest in spirit to Make On 12 February 2011 23:26, Martin O'Brien wrote: > J

Re: [CMake] Ninja: a small build system closest in spirit to Make

On 12 February 2011 23:26, Martin O'Brien wrote: > Just out of curiosity, Matt, what (if anything) did you use to generate the > Ninja files?  Gyp? To build the RPMs I just ran bootstrap.sh which comes with Ninja which (I believe) directly compiles a mini-ninja executable which in turn runs over

Re: [CMake] Ninja: a small build system closest in spirit to Make

2011/2/10 Nicolas Desprès : > Hi everyone, > > Probably some of you are already aware of this new open-source project > coming from a Chrome developer at Google. > > Its goal was to improve the build system performance of the Chrome > project. So it is designed to be a fast replacement for make. >

Re: [CMake] Ninja: a small build system closest in spirit to Make

Just out of curiosity, Matt, what (if anything) did you use to generate the Ninja files? Gyp? Thanks, mm -Original Message- From: cmake-boun...@cmake.org [mailto:cmake-boun...@cmake.org] On Behalf Of Matt Williams Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 5:15 PM To: Nicolas Desprès Cc: CMak

Re: [CMake] linking static vs dynamic

On 02/12/2011 09:39 PM, Andreas Pakulat wrote: > On 12.02.11 21:20:58, Dominik Szczerba wrote: >> I never actually saw a solution to this problem in cmake: >> I need to link (independent constraint from above) with libguide.a and >> not libguide.so (in intel compiler, does not matter much), but bot

Re: [CMake] linking static vs dynamic

On 12.02.11 21:20:58, Dominik Szczerba wrote: > I never actually saw a solution to this problem in cmake: > I need to link (independent constraint from above) with libguide.a and > not libguide.so (in intel compiler, does not matter much), but both > are available, and cmake always takes the shared

Re: [CMake] linking static vs dynamic

On Saturday 12 February 2011, Dominik Szczerba wrote: > I never actually saw a solution to this problem in cmake: > I need to link (independent constraint from above) with libguide.a and > not libguide.so (in intel compiler, does not matter much), but both > are available, and cmake always takes th

[CMake] linking static vs dynamic

I never actually saw a solution to this problem in cmake: I need to link (independent constraint from above) with libguide.a and not libguide.so (in intel compiler, does not matter much), but both are available, and cmake always takes the shared one when given "guide" as the desired library to be l

Re: [CMake] add_subdirectory and eclipse project

On Friday 11 February 2011, Andrea Galeazzi wrote: > Alexander Neundorf ha scritto: > > On Wednesday 09 February 2011, Andrea Galeazzi wrote: > >> Il 08/02/2011 17.58, Alexander Neundorf ha scritto: > >>> On Tuesday 08 February 2011, Andrea Galeazzi wrote: > Il 18/01/2011 19.17, Alexander Neun

Re: [CMake] Copying plugins into a bundle

On 12.02.2011 18:26, Peter Kümmel wrote: I wanna create a bundle on OSX with fixup_bundle but I have problems with plugins. The plugins are build with add_library(MODULE) into ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/plugins. set(app ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/bin/b.app) install(CODE "file(GLOB_RECURSE plugins \"\

Re: [CMake] Detecting 32/64 bit systems

Quite right. So you claim that on Windows CMAKE_SIZEOF_VOID will tell me the *target* build system, not the physical one, while it will mach CMAKE_SYSTEM_PROCESSOR if the both are the same? Many thanks for the clarification. Dominik On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Ryan Pavlik wrote: > CMAKE_S

Re: [CMake] Detecting 32/64 bit systems

CMAKE_SIZEOF_VOID_P will tell you the difference between target bit-widths: 8 (for 64 bit) vs 4 (for 32 bit) - remember that just because you're running on a 64-bit system doesn't mean you're compiling a 64-bit binary. Ryan On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Dominik Szczerba wrote: > OK, got it e

Re: [CMake] Detecting 32/64 bit systems

OK, got it experimentally. You have CMAKE_SYSTEM_PROCESSOR But wait, is the description below correct? http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_Useful_Variables Opposed to the explanations there, which I saw, but took as not what I need, on my systems it amounts to i686 and x86_64, exactly what I need.

[CMake] Copying plugins into a bundle

I wanna create a bundle on OSX with fixup_bundle but I have problems with plugins. The plugins are build with add_library(MODULE) into ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/plugins. set(app ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/bin/b.app) install(CODE "file(GLOB_RECURSE plugins \"\${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/plugins/*${CMAKE_SHARED_

[CMake] Detecting 32/64 bit systems

Hi, I can't really find a clear solution in google: how would one go about detecting if the system is 32 or 64 bit? There are UNIX, WIN32 etc. flags, but nothing really for the architecture. Thanks a lot, Dominik ___ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit ot

Re: [CMake] Boost macro behavior with respect to version

On 02/10/2011 09:17 PM, Adams, Brian M wrote: > I'm curious if the behavior I'm seeing with respect to FindBoost.cmake is > expected. (I realize I'm using these macros in a convoluted way, so > understand if I can't make it work more cleanly.) > > What I'd like to be able to do is something lik

[CMake] Question about ADD_CUSTOM_COMMAND

Dear All, I have a question about ADD_CUSTOM_COMMAND. I read in the doc "If DEPENDS specifies any target (created by an ADD_* command) a target-level dependency is created to make sure the target is built before any target using this custom command. Additionally, if the target is an executab

[CMake] Problem with cmake dependencies

Dear All, here I am again. I still have a problem with cmake dependencies which is a bit complicated (for me at least). I really apologise in advance if what follows is not clear, but I do need your help here. I have a coding convention checker tool that runs on all the source files to check

Re: [CMake] Ninja: a small build system closest in spirit to Make

I forked the original ninja project on my github and cmake'ified it. It successfully compile on linux [ubuntu 10.04, g++ (Ubuntu 4.4.3-4ubuntu5) 4.4.3] Note that both In and Out-of-source built are handled properly. See https://github.com/jcfr/ninja topic branch: cmakeified-project