On Monday 14 January 2008 04:04, Bill Hoffman wrote:
Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Jan 13, 2008 4:23 PM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin Lütken wrote:
That's great then. Do you know who to address in order to get the patch
into the CVS code ?
Actually, what about something
On Monday 14 January 2008 18:42, Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Jan 14, 2008 12:16 PM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brandon Van Every wrote:
Example: I have a legacy handwritten GMake client.mk that acquires the
build tree from CVS before the main Autoconf generated Makefile is
If you do cmake -f client.txt, then every add_subdirectory and subdirs
will now look for client.txt. That is not the way make -f works. If
you do make -f it just changes the initial makefile that is read into
make, after that it is up to the makefile writer to use include, or
recursive
Martin Lutken wrote:
That might work too.
I also does not understand why You are soo resistant to a minor feature which
couldn't really hurt anyone?
I just want to make sure it is a feature that we want. I will be one of
the ones supporting it for as long as CMake is around. As it is
On Tuesday 15 January 2008 16:40, you wrote:
Martin Lutken wrote:
That might work too.
I also does not understand why You are soo resistant to a minor feature
which couldn't really hurt anyone?
I just want to make sure it is a feature that we want. I will be one of
the ones supporting
Martin Lutken wrote:
Hmm well I see It can wait anyway.
I allready do the include-trick from the general Makefile, but in the
transitional phase for a large project it would be much easier to be able do
it that way.
Maybe it's because I never really used CMake GUI frontends Only
On Jan 15, 2008 7:03 AM, Martin Lutken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simple example from my actual codebase. CBS (Common Build System) makefiles
for zlib and libpng, which depends on zlib (install stuff not included):
--- z.cbs ---
TARGET_DEFAULT_VERSION ( 1 2 3 )
ADD_SOURCE_FILE ( adler32.c
On 15.01.08 11:37:12, Brandon Van Every wrote:
I'm unclear. What is the strategic purpose of CBS?
If I understood correctly, the purpose is to (at some point) build
foobar, including all deps completely with cbs. To me this totally
sounds like Gentoo with cmake files as emerge replacement.
On Jan 15, 2008 11:46 AM, Andreas Pakulat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 15.01.08 11:37:12, Brandon Van Every wrote:
I'm unclear. What is the strategic purpose of CBS?
If I understood correctly, the purpose is to (at some point) build
foobar, including all deps completely with cbs.
But is it
On 15.01.08 12:05:36, Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Jan 15, 2008 11:46 AM, Andreas Pakulat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 15.01.08 11:37:12, Brandon Van Every wrote:
I'm unclear. What is the strategic purpose of CBS?
If I understood correctly, the purpose is to (at some point) build
On Jan 15, 2008 2:54 PM, Andreas Pakulat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I meant is, it looks like cbs wants to use CMake to replace the
normal package manager in a source-based distro.
I still don't quite get it, perhaps because I have no practical
experience preparing packages for
On Tuesday 15 January 2008, Martin Lutken wrote:
...
Well hope that gave you an impression of what it is. So the reason I need
an anternative name for the CMakeLists.txt file is that I wan't CBS
makefiles to be able to live side by side with a projects own CMake files.
I'm not sure this is a
On Jan 15, 2008 7:39 PM, Alexander Neundorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Adding a layer written in cmake on top of cmake doesn't sound good IMO. I
think my main problem with autotools was that they were a set of tools, you
had to learn and know each of them, and if one of them failed I was
Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Jan 13, 2008 10:04 PM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many people will run CMake from a GUI and will not be giving a
-f flag. With the patch there would be no way to build a project via
one of the GUI's if it required changing the name of the file.
Quoting Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Jan 13, 2008 10:04 PM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many people will run CMake from a GUI and will not be giving a
-f flag. With the patch there would be no way to build a project via
one of the GUI's if it required
On Jan 14, 2008 11:44 AM, Pau Garcia i Quiles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't specially like the idea of different names for CMakeLists.txt
and I don't see the use case, either. It makes sense for 'make' to
have a '-f' parameter because you have make, gmake, nmake, with
slightly or totally
Brandon Van Every wrote:
Example: I have a legacy handwritten GMake client.mk that acquires the
build tree from CVS before the main Autoconf generated Makefile is
run. The tree is grabbed from CVS and built by typing make -f
client.mk. The simplest translation to a CMake system would be
On Jan 14, 2008 9:01 AM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Jan 13, 2008 10:04 PM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many people will run CMake from a GUI and will not be giving a
-f flag. With the patch there would be no way to build a project via
one
On Jan 14, 2008 12:16 PM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brandon Van Every wrote:
Example: I have a legacy handwritten GMake client.mk that acquires the
build tree from CVS before the main Autoconf generated Makefile is
run. The tree is grabbed from CVS and built by typing make
PROTECTED] on behalf of Brandon Van Every
Sent: Sun 1/13/2008 6:57 PM
To: cmake@cmake.org
Subject: Re: [CMake] Patch to apply! Changing the default nameCMakeLists.txt!
On Jan 13, 2008 12:13 PM, Martin Lütken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a long time since I said I might do this feature
Ok heres a new patch using '-f' as the option!
-Martin Lütken
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Brandon Van Every
Sent: Sun 1/13/2008 6:57 PM
To: cmake@cmake.org
Subject: Re: [CMake] Patch to apply! Changing the default nameCMakeLists.txt!
On Jan 13, 2008 12
On Jan 13, 2008 1:58 PM, Martin Lütken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok heres a new patch using '-f' as the option!
Excellent, thanks! I could actually see a use for this, if it were
available in a production version of CMake. The source tree I'm
working on has multiple layers of Makefiles in
That's great then. Do you know who to address in order to get the patch into
the CVS code ?
-Martin
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Brandon Van Every
Sent: Sun 1/13/2008 8:38 PM
To: cmake@cmake.org
Subject: Re: [CMake] Patch to apply! Changing the default
Martin Lütken wrote:
That's great then. Do you know who to address in order to get the patch
into the CVS code ?
Actually, what about something like this:
# CMakeLists.txt
INCLUDE(${CMAKE_CURRENT_SOURCE_DIR}/${CML_NAME})
cmake /path/to/proj -DCML_NAME:STRING=mycmake1.txt
cmake
On Jan 13, 2008 4:23 PM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin Lütken wrote:
That's great then. Do you know who to address in order to get the patch
into the CVS code ?
Actually, what about something like this:
# CMakeLists.txt
INCLUDE(${CMAKE_CURRENT_SOURCE_DIR}/${CML_NAME})
Brandon Van Every wrote:
On Jan 13, 2008 4:23 PM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin Lütken wrote:
That's great then. Do you know who to address in order to get the patch
into the CVS code ?
Actually, what about something like this:
# CMakeLists.txt
On Jan 13, 2008 10:04 PM, Bill Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many people will run CMake from a GUI and will not be giving a
-f flag. With the patch there would be no way to build a project via
one of the GUI's if it required changing the name of the file.
cmakesetup and ccmake would also
27 matches
Mail list logo
