Hi all,
It would appear that CMake 3.0 to 3.1 introduces a colossal change in
behaviour. This change totally breaks all KDE projects which use
Extra-CMake-Modules, as necessary headers are no longer installed.
This has become an issue following http://build.kde.org/job/cmake/160/
which has led to
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It would appear that CMake 3.0 to 3.1 introduces a colossal change in
> behaviour. This change totally breaks all KDE projects which use
> Extra-CMake-Modules, as necessary headers are no longer installed.
>
> This has become an i
On 10/23/2014 5:11 PM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
And it would seem that the CMake developers prefer to live in their
own closed off little bubble.
Sorry about that. We just want to avoid spam. I have forwarded your
message to the cmake-developers mailing list. Thanks for the report.
-Bill
_
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Bill Hoffman wrote:
> On 10/23/2014 5:11 PM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>>
>> And it would seem that the CMake developers prefer to live in their
>> own closed off little bubble.
Hi Bill,
>
> Sorry about that. We just want to avoid spam. I have forwarded your
> messa
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> It would appear that CMake 3.0 to 3.1 introduces a colossal change in
>> behaviour. This change totally breaks all KDE projects which use
>> Extra-CMake-Modules, as neces
Ben Cooksley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It would appear that CMake 3.0 to 3.1 introduces a colossal change in
> behaviour. This change totally breaks all KDE projects which use
> Extra-CMake-Modules, as necessary headers are no longer installed.
>
> This has become an issue following http://build.kde.
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 5:44 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Ben Cooksley wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> It would appear that CMake 3.0 to 3.1 introduces a colossal change in
>> behaviour. This change totally breaks all KDE projects which use
>> Extra-CMake-Modules, as necessary headers are no longer instal
On Friday, October 24, 2014 18:44:32 Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Ben Cooksley wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > It would appear that CMake 3.0 to 3.1 introduces a colossal change in
> > behaviour. This change totally breaks all KDE projects which use
> > Extra-CMake-Modules, as necessary headers are no longer
Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 5:44 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>> Is build.kde.org now using the release branch of cmake.git instead of the
>> next branch? When/why did that change?
>
> This was changed around about
> http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/2014-June/0166
Hi guys, what's the status of this?
As far as i can see it's still unresolved since kcoreaddons is installing much
fewer headers than it used to
http://build.kde.org/job/kcoreaddons_master_qt5/153/console
vs
http://build.kde.org/job/kcoreaddons_master_qt5/152/console
Do you think it's a valid
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 6:24 AM, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> Hi guys, what's the status of this?
Hi Albert,
I'm waiting for the fixes for this issue, in particular
http://www.cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;a=commit;h=5f414cefb6524d26329484b296004e3c2d97ec4f
to land in 'release'.
Once that happens
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 7:14 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Ben Cooksley wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 5:44 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>>> Is build.kde.org now using the release branch of cmake.git instead of the
>>> next branch? When/why did that change?
>>
>> This was changed around about
>> ht
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 08:50:12 +1300, Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 5:44 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> > Is build.kde.org now using the release branch of cmake.git instead of the
> > next branch? When/why did that change?
>
> This was changed around about
> http://mail.kde.org/pipe
> Earlier this year, I was working on lots of performance metrics of CMake
> and this was part of it. There ended up being more than a dozen branches
> resulting from that work (some of them still unmerged). Doing some
> digging shows that this is where the commit finally hit master:
>
> commi
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 09:58:58 +1300, Ben Cooksley wrote:
> If anyone is interested, help would be appreciated to get a Contracts
> style build up and running.
> In particular, pointers to documentation on how to perform such builds
> would be appreciated - we'll need to run "make install" for pa
15 matches
Mail list logo
