Brad King wrote:
> On 02/11/2014 08:46 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>> We could consider making the LINK_ONLY generator expression public in
>> order to allow the user to decide the granularity here (possibly
>> encapsulated in a INTERFACE_LIBRARY).
>
> For reference, without the interface target it
On 02/11/2014 08:46 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> We could consider making the LINK_ONLY generator expression public in order
> to allow the user to decide the granularity here (possibly encapsulated in a
> INTERFACE_LIBRARY).
For reference, without the interface target it is as simple as:
target
Brad King wrote:
> target_link_libraries(staticB INTERFACE staticA)
>
> However, that will propagate all usage requirements of A to consumers
> of B. Depending on the usage requirements specified for A and B that
> may be correct or not.
We could consider making the LINK_ONLY generator expressi
On 02/10/2014 10:34 PM, Bill Hoffman wrote:
> Someone just posted this comment to one of my blogs:
> (http://www.kitware.com/blog/home/post/434)
>
>> I don’t know if CMake or Ninja (or LLVM’s build rules) are at fault
>> here, but when I build Clang and LLVM under CMake and Ninja, parallelism
>>
Someone just posted this comment to one of my blogs:
(http://www.kitware.com/blog/home/post/434)
I don’t know if CMake or Ninja (or LLVM’s build rules) are at fault
here, but when I build Clang and LLVM under CMake and Ninja, parallelism
often drops to zero when a static library is being linke
