Hi,
This is mostly just feedback on some experience with cross-compiling.
As part of trying to figure out to what extent Qt 5 needs to be patched to
solve the kind of issue raised in
http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=14041
and fixed in 6c613b433c45efb0bb013a6bd668cbb8ac740259, I've
The following issue has been SUBMITTED.
==
http://cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=14073
==
Reported By:Jean-Christophe Fillion-Robin
Assigned To:
Bill Hoffman wrote:
> What about VS 9, seems to be missing?
The Qt CI system only tests 2010 and 2012:
http://testresults.qt-project.org/ci/QtBase_dev_Integration/latest-success/
The wince70embedded-armv4i-msvc2008_Windows_7 build is currently failing for
other reasons, but it's a 'non-enforc
On 4/10/2013 4:45 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>I don't think it's unstable, but I do think the version and arch should be
>detected somehow.
>
I take it back.
It is not hard coded. It is just matching qt win32-msvc2010,
win32-msvc2012 with the correct CMake generator:
win32-g++*:CMAKE_GE
Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Bill Hoffman wrote:
>
>> Seems a bit unstable to hard code the version. I wonder if you can
>> detect the one that is being used somehow?
>
> I don't think it's unstable, but I do think the version and arch should be
> detected somehow.
>
> Would it be possible for cmake
Bill Hoffman wrote:
> Seems a bit unstable to hard code the version. I wonder if you can
> detect the one that is being used somehow?
I don't think it's unstable, but I do think the version and arch should be
detected somehow.
Would it be possible for cmake to run devenv to check the version
Brad King wrote:
> On 04/10/2013 10:30 AM, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
> > I think what Stephen had in mind (I really hope he had *g*) is to show
> > a different warning in that case, telling the user that the toolchain
> > file is ignored on any subsequent run.
>
> Another approach is to not warn when
On 4/10/2013 12:22 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
Yes, I think you're right. I've updated the patch with that information now.
Seems a bit unstable to hard code the version. I wonder if you can
detect the one that is being used somehow?
-Bill
--
Powered by www.kitware.com
Visit other Kitware open
Bill Hoffman wrote:
> On 4/10/2013 11:54 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>> (at the very bottom)
>> http://testresults.qt-project.org/ci/QtBase_stable_Integration/build_00894/win64-msvc2012_developer-build_qtnamespace_Windows_8/log.txt.gz
>>
>> Any ideas?
> I think you want this generator:
> Visual Stu
Brad King wrote:
> Please fix the include directory vector representation to
> support removing the property altogether and add a test case.
> We'll need to get this in before 2.8.11 final.
>
Done.
Thanks,
Steve.
--
Powered by www.kitware.com
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
ht
On 4/10/2013 11:54 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
(at the very bottom)
http://testresults.qt-project.org/ci/QtBase_stable_Integration/build_00894/win64-msvc2012_developer-build_qtnamespace_Windows_8/log.txt.gz
Any ideas?
I think you want this generator:
Visual Studio 11 Win64
-- Check for working C
Stephen Kelly wrote:
> clin...@elemtech.com wrote:
>
>> It appears it needs more logic to handle the CMAKE_GENERATOR variable.
>> If a visual studio generator is going to be used, then it'll probably
>> need logic to determine which version of visual studio it is to choose
>> the correct visual s
Steve,
Since this commit:
http://cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;a=commitdiff;h=18a3195a
CMake crashes on the code
set_property(DIRECTORY PROPERTY INCLUDE_DIRECTORIES)
because code like
this->IncludeDirectoriesEntries.push_back(
cmValueWithOrigin(value, lfbt));
assume
The following issue has been SUBMITTED.
==
http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=14070
==
Reported By:Jarle Aase
Assigned To:
On 04/10/2013 10:30 AM, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
> I think what Stephen had in mind (I really hope he had *g*) is to show
> a different warning in that case, telling the user that the toolchain
> file is ignored on any subsequent run.
Another approach is to not warn when the -DFOO=bar option just
r
Am 10.04.2013 16:17, schrieb Brad King:
On 04/10/2013 07:20 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
Is there any reason this variable shouldn't be special-cased in the
unused
variable handling? If the special case is spelled correctly, it
should be
fine.
If you want to add a whitelist to suppress the warni
On 04/10/2013 07:20 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Is there any reason this variable shouldn't be special-cased in the unused
> variable handling? If the special case is spelled correctly, it should be
> fine.
If you want to add a whitelist to suppress the warning that's fine with me.
-Brad
--
Pow
clin...@elemtech.com wrote:
> It appears it needs more logic to handle the CMAKE_GENERATOR variable.
> If a visual studio generator is going to be used, then it'll probably need
> logic to determine which version of visual studio it is to choose the
> correct visual studio generator (because of pr
- Original Message -
> Eric Noulard wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't know anything about building on Windows, so that might indeed be
> >> the problem. Can you confirm that it's not a misunderstanding?
> >>
> >
> > In http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.qt.devel/10746 we can read:
> > "3>
2013/4/10 Stephen Kelly
> Stephen Kelly wrote:
>
> > So, how is the target 32bit/64bit determined? An option to cmake at cmake
> > time?
>
> It seems to be determined by the generator:
>
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3785976/cmake-generate-visual-studio-2008-solution-for-win32-and-x64
>
Stephen Kelly wrote:
> So, how is the target 32bit/64bit determined? An option to cmake at cmake
> time?
It seems to be determined by the generator:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3785976/cmake-generate-visual-studio-2008-solution-for-win32-and-x64
I'll figure out a way to determine that
Eric Noulard wrote:
>>
>> I don't know anything about building on Windows, so that might indeed be
>> the problem. Can you confirm that it's not a misunderstanding?
>>
>
> In http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.qt.devel/10746 we can read:
> "3>-- Build started: Project: axserverapp, Configu
2013/4/10 Stephen Kelly
> On 04/10/2013 01:29 PM, David Cole wrote:
>
> You’re building a 32-bit CMake and trying to link it to a 64-bit Qt.
>
> Why do you expect that should work?
>
>
> I'm not trying build CMake and I'm not trying to link CMake to Qt.
>
> The Qt CI machines download CMake fro
On 04/10/2013 01:29 PM, David Cole wrote:
You’re building a 32-bit CMake and trying to link it to a 64-bit Qt.
Why do you expect that should work?
I'm not trying build CMake and I'm not trying to link CMake to Qt.
The Qt CI machines download CMake from
http://www.cmake.org/cmake/resources/sof
You’re building a 32-bit CMake and trying to link it to a 64-bit Qt.
Why do you expect that should work?
From: Stephen Kelly
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 4:03 AM
To: cmake-developers@cmake.org
Hi,
A new Qt CI machine machine is hitting problems with the CMake unit tests:
h
Laszlo Papp wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just found this post from Brad:
> http://www.cmake.org/pipermail/cmake/2011-February/042556.html
>
> I would suggest to improve the warning message. It is not exactly clear
> why that happens to a user like me.
My colleague saw this warning in his cmake output when
Hi,
A new Qt CI machine machine is hitting problems with the CMake unit tests:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.qt.devel/10746
Any idea what the problem could be there?
Thanks,
Steve
--
Powered by www.kitware.com
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
http://www.kitware.com/op
27 matches
Mail list logo