Re: [cmake-developers] Adding argument OPTIONAL to find_package() and add_subdirectory

2011-06-09 Thread Rolf Eike Beer
Nicolas Desprès wrote: I have to confess that I never called find_package() without REQUIRED, and I can't think about any use case right now. The most simple one is probably the system-or-bundled one: check if the system has a good version of some package, use the one bundled with the sources

Re: [cmake-developers] Adding argument OPTIONAL to find_package() and add_subdirectory

2011-06-09 Thread Alexander Neundorf
On Thursday 09 June 2011, Nicolas Desprès wrote: On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Alexander Neundorf neund...@kde.org wrote: ... I can't think of any reason why somebody would want to use find_package(...without REQUIRED) instead of optional_find_package(). Can somebody else see a reason

Re: [cmake-developers] Automoc in cmake

2011-06-09 Thread Alexander Neundorf
On Wednesday 08 June 2011, Brad King wrote: On 6/8/2011 2:59 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: The two things are - BSD licensing, we did that 3 years ago: http://quickgit.kde.org/?p=automoc.gita=commith=78fdba1e2d96bc455125317 48ffb770cb1124798 -and porting to STL+cmsys, we did that now

Re: [cmake-developers] Automoc in cmake

2011-06-09 Thread Rolf Eike Beer
On Thursday 09 June 2011, Alexander Neundorf wrote: ... At build time, the logic is complex enough and it also has to be really fast so that this should IMO be done in the C++. It could either be a -E automoc infofile option, or a -P CMakeAutomoc.cmake script, which then calls a new

Re: [cmake-developers] Adding argument OPTIONAL to find_package() and add_subdirectory

2011-06-09 Thread Brad King
On 6/9/2011 2:58 AM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: This wish comes mainly from packagers, not from the developers themselves. I am sure packagers would be happy if they had one consistent way to disable every package any cmake checks for with a standardized option. This is a nice goal, but I do

Re: [cmake-developers] Automoc in cmake

2011-06-09 Thread Brad King
On 6/9/2011 4:12 AM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: AFAIK depending on generated files via the #include does not work/is not reliable (that's why generated files need to be added to the target). For the Makefile generators, each target builds in three steps: (1) Generate all custom command outputs

Re: [cmake-developers] Adding argument OPTIONAL to find_package() and add_subdirectory

2011-06-09 Thread Alexander Neundorf
On Thursday 09 June 2011, Brad King wrote: On 6/9/2011 2:58 AM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: This wish comes mainly from packagers, not from the developers themselves. I am sure packagers would be happy if they had one consistent way to disable every package any cmake checks for with a

Re: [cmake-developers] Automoc in cmake

2011-06-09 Thread Brad King
On 6/9/2011 8:47 AM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: So, if I would create a dummy foo.automoc file from automoc, and added this to the target, this would make sure that any files created as side-effects of this custom command would already exist when any source files are compiled ? Yes. I

Re: [cmake-developers] Adding argument OPTIONAL to find_package() and add_subdirectory

2011-06-09 Thread Marcus D. Hanwell
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote: On 6/9/2011 8:50 AM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: What if the FindFoo.cmake script calls find_package(Bar) and does not require it but the project also does find_package(Bar) and does? I'm sure there are more cases I haven't

Re: [cmake-developers] Automoc in cmake

2011-06-09 Thread Clinton Stimpson
On Thursday, June 09, 2011 01:23:09 am Alexander Neundorf wrote: On Wednesday 08 June 2011, Brad King wrote: On 6/8/2011 2:59 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: The two things are - BSD licensing, we did that 3 years ago: