On 01/21/2011 04:41 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Friday 21 January 2011, Michael Hertling wrote: >> On 01/20/2011 07:01 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: >>> On Sunday 09 January 2011, Michael Hertling wrote: > ... >>>>> I don't really understand why you want to get the LOCATION from your >>>>> target, anyway, the get_target_property works fine if you use >>>>> set_target_properties before it. [...] >>>> >>>> ...but SET_TARGET_PROPERTIES() doesn't work fine if it's used after >>>> GET_TARGET_PROPERTY(), even if both operate on different properties. >>> >>> Well, they are not completely different. >>> If I remember correctly, the LOCATION property is "calculcated" when you >>> query it. I think it changes some internal variables. Apparently to a >>> state where setting the target property afterwards doesn't have the >>> desired effect anymore :-/ >> >> So, what's your conclusion in this matter? Should the behavior in >> question be considered as a bug or is it alright? IMO, such a subtle > > IMO looks quite obvious like a bug. I just wanted to say that there is some > connection between the properties.
While this issue with the LOCATION/LOCATION_<CONFIG> properties has been clarified in #11671 in the meantime, I wonder whether there're more interconnections of that kind among other properties, just to be mindful of them when they emerge. So, does anybody have some information on this? Regards, Michael _______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
