On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 12:17:31PM -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> On Oct 4, 2018, at 11:19 AM, Guy Harris wrote:
>
> > doesn't help, and there doesn't appear to *be* any documentation for the
> > alleged "CMAKE_C_FLAGS_*" flags.
>
> What they meant was "CMAKE__FLAGS_* flags".
>
> And I've filed a
On Oct 4, 2018, at 11:19 AM, Guy Harris wrote:
> doesn't help, and there doesn't appear to *be* any documentation for the
> alleged "CMAKE_C_FLAGS_*" flags.
What they meant was "CMAKE__FLAGS_* flags".
And I've filed a bug against CMake complaining about the opacity of the
documentation.
_
If anybody in the audience knows how CMake determines the flags to be used when
linking a particular executable target, based on:
the setting of CMAKE_EXE_LINKER_FLAGS;
the setting of CMAKE_EXE_LINKER_FLAGS_ for the configuration
being built;
the LINK_FLAGS property of
See change 30004: https://code.wireshark.org/review/#/c/30004/
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 at 18:20, Maynard, Chris
wrote:
> With master, I’m seeing 16 new linker warnings of the form, “LINK :
> warning LNK4075: ignoring '/INCREMENTAL' due to '/RELEASE' specification”.
>
> It seems the buildbot is seeing
With master, I'm seeing 16 new linker warnings of the form, "LINK : warning
LNK4075: ignoring '/INCREMENTAL' due to '/RELEASE' specification".
It seems the buildbot is seeing them too. From
https://buildbot.wireshark.org/wireshark-master/builders/Windows%20Server%202016%20x64/builds/3776/steps/
