Hi,
Von: Amitha Perera [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon 29 May 2006, William A. Hoffman wrote:
There is a wxWidgets GUI in CVS. The question is, would a GUI make
the configure command line people happy, or will there always be a
group that wants a -- style command line like configure.
A
Von: Thomas Zander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Friday 26 May 2006 17:55, you wrote:
A 'configure' script generator that will just convert between the
(good old) configure and the cmake foo. Makes it actually possible
to discover what features there are without consulting online
At 02:42 AM 5/29/2006, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
There is ccmake on UNIX and (the more powerful) cmakesetup on Windows for this
job. What is missing is something like a qcmake, which would add a nice GUI
to all available options.
There is a wxWidgets GUI in CVS. The question is, would a GUI
On Monday 29 May 2006 18:00, William A. Hoffman wrote:
There is ccmake on UNIX and (the more powerful) cmakesetup on Windows for
this job. What is missing is something like a qcmake, which would add a
nice GUI to all available options.
There is a wxWidgets GUI in CVS. The question is,
On Friday 26 May 2006 21:00, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
The problem with the use-(g)make decision is that you are stuck with
using unintuitive variable names to alter the build process.
Then dump it and develop with VC++. Or some other compiler with a
better (or just different ;-)
Thomas Zander wrote:
But, to directly answer your assertion; the most human feeling of me
feeling lost when there is something new to learn is not the reason for
my emails here. I honestly find it counter productive of you to go for
that excuse. Its soo easy.
The suggestions I made here are
When I change a couple of header files I suddenly see it reconfiguring for
no apparent reason.
Is the generated makefile thinking that there is a change in
CMakeLists.txt somewhere? Surely cmake is actually out of the
picture unless you tell it to rebuild the makefiles?
Its when I type 'make'
On Sunday 28 May 2006 15:39, James Mansion wrote:
Its when I type 'make' it takes upto a minute before it actually
starts with the first gcc, even if I typed make moments before. (I
just typed 'make | less' this time).
That looks like make's performance problem doesn't it?
I don't see how
At 10:56 AM 5/28/2006, Thomas Zander wrote:
On Sunday 28 May 2006 15:39, James Mansion wrote:
Its when I type 'make' it takes upto a minute before it actually
starts with the first gcc, even if I typed make moments before. (I
just typed 'make | less' this time).
That looks like make's
On Friday 26 May 2006 21:42, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
Another issue is that an autoconf ./configure script typically relies
on libtool. You don't wanna go there.
Read my other mails in this thread please; its the NAME ONLY I suggested
to use.
If the configure script is just 4kb and does
At 07:30 AM 5/26/2006, Thomas Zander wrote:
Hiya;
In KDE (including KOffice) we switched to cmake, as you are probably
aware. I naturally like the speedups we got in linking etc. but I like
the less then stellar usability of the cmake solution a lot less. (at
this point I would gladly go back
On Friday 26 May 2006 16:24, you wrote:
I am not sure I understand what you want to type to do the build?
williamMake would do; of wmake if you want. :)
Bottom line; I don't care what the name is as long as it _can_ be made
more usable. Which is impossible with make.
You apparently are
Thomas Zander wrote:
On Friday 26 May 2006 16:24, you wrote:
I am not sure I understand what you want to type to do the build?
williamMake would do; of wmake if you want. :)
Bottom line; I don't care what the name is as long as it _can_ be made
more usable. Which is impossible with make.
On Friday 26 May 2006 17:05, Thomas Zander wrote:
On Friday 26 May 2006 16:24, you wrote:
I am not sure I understand what you want to type to do the build?
williamMake would do; of wmake if you want. :)
Bottom line; I don't care what the name is as long as it _can_ be made
more usable.
At 11:05 AM 5/26/2006, Thomas Zander wrote:
On Friday 26 May 2006 16:24, you wrote:
I am not sure I understand what you want to type to do the build?
williamMake would do; of wmake if you want. :)
Bottom line; I don't care what the name is as long as it _can_ be made
more usable. Which is
On Friday 26 May 2006 17:52, Craig Bradney wrote:
On Friday 26 May 2006 17:05, Thomas Zander wrote:
On Friday 26 May 2006 16:24, you wrote:
I am not sure I understand what you want to type to do the build?
williamMake would do; of wmake if you want. :)
Bottom line; I don't care what
On Friday 26 May 2006 17:55, you wrote:
A 'configure' script generator that will just convert between the
(good old) configure and the cmake foo. Makes it actually possible
to discover what features there are without consulting online
documentation ;)
I am not sure about what you want
Yo Thomas,
We use cmake to build a large project (10 or so different SDKs).
In our case, we too wanted a cmakebuild tool, so we wrote one.
It wraps the native build tools with a higher level of commands
build debug build release run tests package SDKs etc.
Some of the commands for this build
Lloyd Hilaiel wrote:
Yo Thomas,
We use cmake to build a large project (10 or so different SDKs).
In our case, we too wanted a cmakebuild tool, so we wrote one.
It wraps the native build tools with a higher level of commands
build debug build release run tests package SDKs etc.
Some of
On Friday 26 May 2006 18:02, frederic heem wrote:
Actually, I wonder why CMAKE_VERBOSE_MAKEFILE is not set to TRUE by
default, each time, I have to set it manually and I find it quite
annoying.
Everyone I know gave a sigh of relieve when unsermake (2 years ago)
introduced the concept of
Thomas Zander wrote:
Its because it slows me down a lot.
When I change a couple of header files I suddenly see it reconfiguring for
no apparent reason.
Its when I type 'make' it takes upto a minute before it actually starts
with the first gcc, even if I typed make moments before. (I just
Thomas Zander wrote:
I have helped a set of people on irc to get started with koffice compiling
using cmake. They all had a lot of problems with the arcane variables
like the CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX and most people find that D in front a bit
weird a well.
So; instead of letting the user
Filipe Sousa wrote:
There is always ccmake and cmakeseup. Another option is to create a tool
called "cconfigure" for those who like configure scripts. That shouldn't
be to hard to implement. cconfigure --help would show the same options
as ccmake:
$ ./cconfigure --help
--cmake_build_type
At 05:03 PM 5/26/2006, Axel Roebel wrote:
cmake --help
cmake variables
--build_type Choose the type of build, options are: ...
--install_prefix Install path prefix, prepended onto install directories
--verbose_make If this value is on, makefiles will be
project options
--USE_FOOBAR
24 matches
Mail list logo