is attractive in a build tool.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
On Dec 17, 2007 11:51 PM, Alan W. Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2007-12-17 23:02-0500 Brandon Van Every wrote:
I guess you have no fear of a Disruptive Technology biting you in the ass.
That is correct. Disruptive technology by definition is overwhelmingly
superior,
I'm not sure you
On Dec 18, 2007 12:42 AM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some of those low-end
things like JRake are even getting traction. There's a constellation
of blog entries about them. It performs significant work despite not
having 51 person-years into it.
It occurs to me that Java
. Now there's a movement that thinks XML
wasn't such a hot idea, that you really do need scripting in a build
system after all, and that it's advantageous to get rid of the XML.
This notion seems to have gained steam for about the past 4 years.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
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
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 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
On Dec 14, 2007 8:45 PM, Alexander Neundorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 14 December 2007, Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Dec 14, 2007 2:38 PM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It really boils down to this: There is no way we can ever stop
supporting the current cmake language
On Dec 14, 2007 10:57 PM, Rodolfo Lima [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brandon Van Every escreveu:
Most of my concerns about nicety of
language are strategic, not tactical.
Let's not forget that cmake is being used by KDE, I think they wouldn't
change again their build system :)
By hand
and
scope into CMake CVS and the community hasn't even tried those out
yet. But hopefully I've painted a picture of how competitors could
stomp all over you in 5 years' time. Or how you could stomp all over
them.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake
On Dec 15, 2007 1:55 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 15, 2007 12:41 PM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are some vocal
complainers about the language, but I suspect there is a silent majority
that really don't care,
CMake is a self-selecting community
, like a
digit of a library version?
-NOTFOUND doesn't trouble me so much, as it's unlikely to be
accidentally matched in a regex.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
maintainable and portable
when CMake gets rid of all those tools. I also think it's
strategically better for CMake's growth, to have people banging out
more and more CMake script.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http
it.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
,
is an example of a build system that's much better in a fullblown
language like Lua, that would be extremely painful to write in a
stripped down language like CMake. We'll have to ask other build
communities about such a project; obviously it won't exist in CMake
code.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
the issue, or *appearing* to address the issue, is strategically
important.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
. this is clearly better
rather than I think it would be better.
I agree that Kitware hasn't been persuaded of the value of using a 3rd
party open source language. But why should we stop investigating at
their say-so?
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing
as an important development language, and it never
will be.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
is feasible. And in one's own code, one has to choose whether to
embrace a string-oriented or list-oriented flag handling style. More
grist for the chapter.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo
use CMake modules either.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
for what's a list
and what's a string. And as long as I don't care about semicolons ;
in my list elements.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
a time; hope those were fixed.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
.
- a bug that's reproducible. In which case, I file a bug report.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
on this point.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
On Dec 12, 2007 8:08 PM, Jesse Corrington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When running CMake from the command line, how can I specify the directory to
put the output files in. Thanks.
Jesse
___
CMake mailing list
VARIABLE) but works with all versions of
CMake.
One of these days I'm going to try to construct a pathological input
to make it barf. But I've still got other priorities.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http
write a macro. Otherwise I'll just
write straight CMake script, because I'd rather read CMake script than
the docs of 5 different Unixy tools that all do their own kind of
regular expression processing.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake
CMake (any CMake) doesn't work on the problem
machine.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
whatever_defines -D [...]
)
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
On Dec 3, 2007 5:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I invoke the macro by calling it with C2ADA(${LIST_OF_FILES} ADS).
Is there a possibilty to do what I want by using another command?
You want variable arguments. Look in the MACRO docs for ARGC, ARGV, and ARGN.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
. When's the
next minor rev due out?
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
is going on? Thanks.
I'd completely throw out your source and binary treees, start your
build from scratch, and make sure it's absolutely clean, without PATH
interference from other versions of CMake.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake
escaped_path ${escaped_path})
if(absolute_path MATCHES ^${escaped_path})
string(REPLACE
${toplevel_path}
relative_path ${absolute_path})
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman
On Dec 3, 2007 7:35 AM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, there is no way currently in cmake to switch compilers once picked...
Which I think is a good thing. It would drive me nuts if I couldn't
count on the compiler choice as an invariant.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
On 03.12.07 05:47:29, Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Dec 3, 2007 5:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I invoke the macro by calling it with C2ADA(${LIST_OF_FILES} ADS).
Is there a possibilty to do what I want by using another command?
You want variable arguments. Look in the MACRO docs
/(.*) contains every possible
# instance of /source/ in the string. There is only 1 possible
# REPLACE.
string(REPLACE
${source_and_after}
before ${CMAKE_CURRENT_SOURCE_DIR})
endif(source_and_after)
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing
On Dec 2, 2007 5:02 PM, pepone. onrez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any ideas for this task
Aren't the CMake docs sufficient to explain this? FIND_PROGRAM... or whatever.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http
On Dec 2, 2007 5:06 PM, pepone. onrez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello
I whant to view the commands that are running with out of the arguments ,
there are any options for enable this
make VERBOSE=1
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
no consensus that it's desirable.
Do you feel the documentation of macro() is adequate to explain the
formal argument processing, or is more needed?
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo
that hopefully just aren't present in PCRE.
0005999: REGEX ^ does not anchor against the original string
http://www.cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=5999
0005537: REGEX MATCH and MATCHALL can be pathologically slow
http://www.cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=5537
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
On Nov 29, 2007 2:18 AM, Jesper Eskilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Nov 28, 2007 2:47 AM, Pau Garcia i Quiles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Talking about Ruby, could someone please paste his wishlist about
variable scoping for CMake? (ie what would you like to add
On Nov 29, 2007 12:37 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We all have our points of view about how important various
things are. Alexander has gone on record as anti-complexity; he
Considers Programming Harmful in a build system. I don't agree with
him; I figure if I need scope
it leave you with a bunch of
unresolved questions? If so, I'd suggest going back into the archive
and responding to specific things you're unclear about.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman
of an argument list. In
fact, come to think of it, if it's a CMake reserved function, hand it
off to a special argument processor, would solve much of the problem.
Then you're just down to changing Lua table constructors, so that
they don't require quotes.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
On Nov 28, 2007 3:59 AM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For any given CMake function, we know what argument types we expect.
The programmer is responsible for dereferencing, we're not going to do
it for them. We just have to parse the keywords like STATIC, and pay
attention
code. People wouldn't have much need for those if
CMake's language features were sufficient.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
On Nov 28, 2007 3:20 AM, E. Wing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd also like a shorter way to dereference a table than
unpack(table).
Seriously, this is a total non-issue and unpack is totally unnecessary.
The argument evaluation model matters.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
rootlist)
SET(outlist)
FOREACH(root ${${rootlist}})
LIST(APPEND outlist ${prefix}${root})
ENDFOREACH(root)
SET(${rootlist} ${outlist})
ENDMACRO(ADD_PREFIX)
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
On Nov 28, 2007 1:25 AM, Stefan Kögl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
how to install files generated
and cons of it.
Frankly, I see it as a race between the supposed ease of improving the
CMake language, and the demonstrated ease of slapping Lua into it.
With provisios about whether we really want straight Lua; at present I
don't, so I'm inclined towards more work.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
On Nov 28, 2007 6:45 AM, Stefan Kögl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 28. November 2007 10:38:20 schrieb Brandon Van Every:
You need to know the names of the files that will be generated and
then INSTALL(FILES ...)
Typically I just have a hardwired list of root words, from which I
On Nov 28, 2007 1:28 PM, Alexander Neundorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 28 November 2007, Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Nov 28, 2007 3:17 AM, E. Wing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right now I think it's just an experiment to see how things might
work, how much effort would be involved
to set the compiler through cmake script if possible. Is there anyway
to do this?
I don't get it. If I pick a compiler via CMakeSetup, I'm telling you
what build I want. What do you mean?
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake
to know whether this is natural in it. It's definitely not
natural in C++ and I wouldn't choose C++ for specifying a build
system.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
there are other things I recommended that weren't
done. Oh well, not my problem. If Dart looks like Deathware than so
be it.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
2) It would be a good idea to open a bug tracker dedicated to Dart2.
3) It would also be a good idea to have a dedicated Dart2 webpage.
I think
Bah, wrong mailing list, sorry.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
On Nov 26, 2007 3:55 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I noticed the unpack command.
sources = {
simpleLib.cxx,
simpleCLib.c,
simpleWe.cpp
}
cm_add_library (simpleLib, STATIC, unpack(sources));
Would this be necessary / paradigmatic in Lua? In CMake I just use lists
On Nov 27, 2007 2:32 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 26, 2007 3:55 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I noticed the unpack command.
sources = {
simpleLib.cxx,
simpleCLib.c,
simpleWe.cpp
}
cm_add_library (simpleLib, STATIC, unpack(sources
likely be
typing. Googling...
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
is
an expensive proposition that many sites can't undertake just because
a new tool like SCons might require it. When faced with that sort of
choice, it's much less risky and expensive for them to just walk away
from trying the new tool.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
ain't quite good enough. Can
we turn it into 95% Lua that's 100% CMake?
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
- popularity boost for 5 years
- some advanced programming constructs gained
Anyone want to add to this?
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
On Nov 28, 2007 1:16 AM, Sebastien BARRE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 11/28/2007 01:06 AM, Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Nov 28, 2007 12:56 AM, George Neill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe I am missing the obvious, but I am trying to understand -why- this
list is talking about replacing
On Nov 28, 2007 1:48 AM, George Neill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/28/07, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- better scoping
- higher quality, outsourced documentation
- outsource core language bugs
- popularity boost for 5 years
- some advanced programming constructs gained
.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
,
simpleWe.cpp
}
cm_add_library (simpleLib, STATIC, unpack(sources));
Would this be necessary / paradigmatic in Lua? In CMake I just use lists.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Pragmas.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Function-Attributes.html
do these help?
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
. Could invoke with cmake -P mybuildscript if you don't
mind CMake script and don't want another language dependency.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
. You'd do:
ADD_DEFINITIONS, ADD_LIBRARY, REMOVE_DEFINITIONS, ADD_EXECUTABLE.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
. documenter dilemma. That said, I'm
adding a FAQ entry about this.
Is all this written up nicely in the Mastering CMake book? I've
never read it. I learned CMake by hacking.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http
CMake
environments, using a different one is a common tactic until you
figure out what's going on.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
exact command lines and the full output. Also,
please start from the top, cleanly if you do something to improve
the situation.
I can bootstrap on Cygwin without any problems. I'll try on Linux
when you post next.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake
hearing from anyone who has got this working.
The mailing list archives say don't use Cygwin gmake for this.
http://www.cmake.org/pipermail/cmake/2006-August/010617.html
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http
in Debian main.
It's solved.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
individuals do. But it strikes me as being pretty dumb. Maybe you
should get on the curl mailing lists and see if you can wrangle some
consistency out of them.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman
the issue. Stopping distribution of
semi-proprietary apps that use a Qt commercial license is the issue.
I'm looking around to see if there have been any flaps over this.
Meanwhile, here's their license overview.
http://trolltech.com/products/qt/licenses/licensing
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
On Nov 20, 2007 11:18 AM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 20, 2007 8:36 AM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hendrik Sattler wrote:
Anyway, the GPL stuff still stands.
Why don't you make the Qt dialog source GPL, then?
With those restrictions, some Linux
On Nov 20, 2007 12:52 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 20 November 2007 10:45:56 am Mike Jackson wrote:
On Nov 20, 2007 12:34 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 20, 2007 11:18 AM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 20, 2007 8:36 AM, Bill Hoffman
of the
Qt GPL Exception. But that's really their problem.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
On Nov 20, 2007 2:41 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think in the real world, Kitware can distribute QtDialog under
CMake's license, and Linux distro gatekeepers won't object.
I would suggest making clear reference to the exception in the
QtDialog source code. So that (1
On Nov 20, 2007 2:59 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 20, 2007 2:41 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think in the real world, Kitware can distribute QtDialog under
CMake's license, and Linux distro gatekeepers won't object.
I would suggest making clear
of software packages have standard
directory conventions for #include files.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
On Nov 20, 2007 6:47 PM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Nov 20, 2007 2:59 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 20, 2007 2:41 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think in the real world, Kitware can distribute QtDialog under
is
exactly the legal framework needed. Kitware is exactly the kind of
open source company that Trolltech is trying to make life easier for.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
BTW please don't use SUBDIRS, use ADD_SUBDIRECTORY. SUBDIRS is
archaic, has slightly different behavior, and is officially
depreciated in the upcoming CMake 2.6.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org
weird library that user forgot about that
isn't even compiled for the correct runtime. Realize, Windows is the
platform you're probably looking for this stuff. Keeping MSVC,
Cygwin, and MinGW build environments separate from each other is a
PITA.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
, then I agree that CMake should
not hardwire the directory.
So which is it?
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Doesn't GCC have #pragma operators to control this from within the
file? MSVC does.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
On Nov 18, 2007 10:32 AM, Cees Wesseling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On a large project I am running into a possible optimization bug in gcc.
I nailed the problem down to 1 source
to put your
ADD_SUBDIRECTORY statement earlier, to prevent propagation of
-D_BUILD_DLL.
Perhaps you want the REMOVE_DEFINITIONS command?
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
at
times tend towards basic issues, is to keep myself in shape for
things I'm going to need to do at a later time. Conversely, I don't
tend to bother with problems I think I'm unlikely to run into anytime
soon.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing
On Nov 15, 2007 2:49 AM, Amit C. Kr. Saluja [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
How can I add to the all: target to invoke make in
handwritten Makefiles through CMake
add_custom_target(targetname ALL ...
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
by
the custom target.
Wrap your external command in a CMake script.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
MSVC is weird, so a
lot of special work is done for it (and for lookalike compilers.)
Now, is CMake already set up to detect mico-c++? Don't know; I bet
not. But it would be easy enough for you to implement, or for the
user to specify manually.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
On Nov 15, 2007 1:53 PM, Josef Karthauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
Of Brandon Van Every
Sent: 15 November 2007 14:17
To: cmake@cmake.org
Subject: Re: [CMake] Setting environment variables
On Nov 15, 2007 3:04 PM, Eric Noulard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I currently lack a command which could give me
all sources files in a directory.
FILE(GLOB ... ?
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org
a dependency, if my_lib
doesn't utilize my_otherlib?
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
names
must be unique.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
___
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
On Nov 12, 2007 12:32 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SUBDIRS( wrap )
This is archaic. The preferred command nowadays is ADD_SUBDIRECTORY.
There are some differences between the two commands IIRC. I don't
know that it affects your problem, but who knows?
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
I see the same construct in CHECK_INCLUDE_FILES. What is the intent?
This is not safe.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
On Nov 7, 2007 11:38 AM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It begins with:
MACRO(CHECK_C_SOURCE_COMPILES SOURCE VAR)
IF(${VAR} MATCHES ^${VAR}$)
What is the intent
201 - 300 of 575 matches
Mail list logo
