Hmlooks like this topic already popped up in the past -
http://www.mail-archive.com/cmake@cmake.org/msg06916.html
--
Best regards, Pavel
___
Powered by www.kitware.com
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
Hi,
I wonder, is there an option in cmake to check that a custom command
has produced the files it should have produced?
In my case, doxygen may not produce all the expected files, depending
on the comment it finds in the source code, but install of the man
pages will fail because of
2009/2/17 Pavel Shevaev pacha.shev...@gmail.com:
If your binary to install is a CMake target (like in your example)
you should use:
install(targets foo
RUNTIME DESTINATION ${foo_SOURCE_DIR}/bin)
This one didn't work neither :(
moreover installing in ${foo_SOURCE_DIR} is a bit
Yes but you may still want to separate BUILD from SOURCE tree
and install in
${PROJECT_BINARY_DIR}/bin
Thanks, I'll consider this option too. I can't use it at the moment
though since users of the app got used to the bin directory in the
top level of the source tree...
That's right, it
2009/2/17 Gaëtan Lehmann gaetan.lehm...@jouy.inra.fr:
Hi,
I wonder, is there an option in cmake to check that a custom command has
produced the files it should have produced?
I don't think there is such option.
However if you have the list of supposedly produced files you may
check if they
In a top-level CMakeLists I have the following lines
PROJECT(BuildDLL14)
CMAKE_MINIMUM_REQUIRED(VERSION 2.6)
SET(CMAKE_MODULE_PATH /usr/local/share/CMake)
SET(CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR})
ADD_SUBDIRECTORY(DLL-1)
ADD_SUBDIRECTORY(TestDLL)
---
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Alexander Neundorf a.neundorf-w...@gmx.net
wrote:
Since many of the dependencies overlap, is there general interest in
this
kind of a thing from the VTK perspective or from others?
The goal would be to create an open-source project (hosted probably at a
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Luigi Calori l.cal...@cineca.it wrote:
Alexander Neundorf ha scritto:
I do not see value in keeping sources (as VTK does) apart from avoid the
download-expand step.
If the cmake scripts use glob rex expr to get source files, it should be
quite resilient to
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 6:54 AM, Mike Arthur m...@mikearthur.co.uk wrote:
On Tuesday 17 February 2009 02:24:17 Alan W. Irwin wrote:
Of course, you can debate forever whether such a SF project would be
successful or not, but the only way to really know is to try it and see.
That is, start
I would say that something isn't quite setup correctly with your cmake
project because lots of us use this technique and it works as
advertised. All I can think of is there is a loss of a dependency
somewhere.
---
Mike Jackson www.bluequartz.net
On Feb 17, 2009, at 1:35
Bill Hoffman wrote:
Philip Lowman wrote:
I've reopened this feature request as a bug because
1.) using ctest does not work
2.) the ENVIRONMENT test property is not documented
Discovered both of these issues tonight after looking into Ankit's
request and vaguely recalling this being
Philip Lowman wrote:
For the first cut I think starting out with keeping the CMakified
sources in the project would be fine. Many people are never going to
want anything more complicated than this and we know that this will at
least work for now.
CMake can already untar with -E mode.
I suspect you are right about me running the wrong ctest. Sorry for the
false alarm there. Glad the docs will be fixed though.
.. Original Message ...
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 09:31:40 -0500 Bill Hoffman
bill.hoff...@kitware.com wrote:
Bill Hoffman wrote:
Philip Lowman wrote:
I've
Patrick Spendrin wrote:
Does this sound interesting?
Yes.
As I am maintaining patches for some libraries and working for some
others, it would be nice to have such a unified system to keep doubled
work amount low.
This has some more points:
We would not have to maintain our patches in our
Hello,
I want Visual C++ to output executables, DLLs, etc to the builddir
without creating Release, Debug, RelWithDebInfo, etc
directories. In our case, this would be very convenient for debugging.
I have found the CMAKE_INTDIR and CMAKE_CFG_INTDIR variables but
neither SET( CMAKE_INTDIR . ) nor
On Tuesday 17 February 2009, you wrote:
...
Of course, you can debate forever whether such a SF project would be
successful or not, but the only way to really know is to try it and see.
That is, start with something small and expand from there. I don't have
time to help with such a SF project
On Tuesday 17 February 2009, Micha Renner wrote:
In a top-level CMakeLists I have the following lines
PROJECT(BuildDLL14)
CMAKE_MINIMUM_REQUIRED(VERSION 2.6)
SET(CMAKE_MODULE_PATH /usr/local/share/CMake)
SET(CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR})
ADD_SUBDIRECTORY(DLL-1)
On Tuesday 17 February 2009 17:34:20 Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
I want Visual C++ to output executables, DLLs, etc to the builddir
without creating Release, Debug, RelWithDebInfo, etc
directories. In our case, this would be very convenient for debugging.
I have found the CMAKE_INTDIR and
Bill Hoffman ha scritto:
Philip Lowman wrote:
For the first cut I think starting out with keeping the CMakified
sources in the project would be fine. Many people are never going to
want anything more complicated than this and we know that this will
at least work for now.
CMake can
AddExternalProject is related. It can be used to download files as custom
build steps. (And then configure, build, install... other projects.)
It is only in CVS CMake right now, but it is on its way to maturing to the
point where it could be used for a project like this fairly quickly.
On Tue,
Trying to get up to speed on this thread- apologies if I missed this.
Long story short, as an OSS developer and new Cmake user, I'm less
interested in getting libfoo building with Cmake and a lot more
interested in CMake modules for detecting and using libfoo in my own
project. In reality, these
I read through this thread, and I think there may be a better route -
Instead of trying to create all kinds of patches, etc; why not make a simple
tool to convert an autotool project to CMake and vice-versa? Perhaps call it
'autotool2cmake'?
This way, the process becomes simpler:
1) Download
Aaron Turner wrote:
Trying to get up to speed on this thread- apologies if I missed this.
Long story short, as an OSS developer and new Cmake user, I'm less
interested in getting libfoo building with Cmake and a lot more
interested in CMake modules for detecting and using libfoo in my own
BRM wrote:
I read through this thread, and I think there may be a better route -
Instead of trying to create all kinds of patches, etc; why not make a
simple tool to convert an autotool project to CMake and vice-versa?
Perhaps call it 'autotool2cmake'?
This way, the process becomes simpler:
Just tried building cmake from source on Linux X86_64 (KUbuntu running
inside Sun's Virtual Box environment. The only thing that got built
was cmake, cpack and ctest. Where is ccmake at? I looked through the ./
configure --help and nothing really jumped out at me.
Thanks
On Tuesday 17 February 2009, Bill Hoffman wrote:
Aaron Turner wrote:
...
Honestly, I think in the long run, improving the existing standard
library of Cmake modules to allow developers to concentrate on how to
build their own code rather then figure out how to link to various
libraries
I recently did a 64 bit ubuntu cmake build and had the same outcome.
I installed curses (from package I think) then ccmake built for me.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Michael Jackson
mike.jack...@bluequartz.net wrote:
Just tried building cmake from source on Linux X86_64 (KUbuntu running
I recently did a 64 bit ubuntu cmake build and had the same outcome.
I installed curses (from package I think) then ccmake built for me.
make that ncurses 5.7 built from source.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Michael Jackson
mike.jack...@bluequartz.net wrote:
Just tried building cmake
Yep. Silly me, expecting ncurses to be installed by default..
---
Mike Jackson www.bluequartz.net
On Feb 17, 2009, at 3:25 PM, David E DeMarle wrote:
I recently did a 64 bit ubuntu cmake build and had the same outcome.
I installed curses (from package I think) then ccmake
I'll try that. I just did the apt-get thing to install the libncurses5-
dev package and the cmake boot strapper still can not find the curses
library.
---
Mike Jackson www.bluequartz.net
On Feb 17, 2009, at 3:27 PM, David E DeMarle wrote:
I recently did a 64 bit ubuntu
On Feb 15, 2009, at 8:15 PM, Robert Haines wrote:
I'd be interested in your feedback if you look at them. I don't have
a situation at the moment where I need a certain version of python
for my code which is why this issue totaly past me by so far.
The scripts included worked well. I
2009/2/17 Michael Jackson mike.jack...@bluequartz.net:
I'll try that. I just did the apt-get thing to install the libncurses5-dev
package and the cmake boot strapper still can not find the curses library.
I do build CMake 2.6-patch 3 RC-13 on Debian Lenny amd64
and ccmake did build fine.
2009/2/17 Alexander Neundorf a.neundorf-w...@gmx.net:
But a http://autoconf-archive.cryp.to/ type archive for CMake modules
would also be a good idea.
At FOSDEM we also discussed about something like this, some kind of
semi-official place where to get additional cmake files.
Right now you
2009/2/17 Eric Noulard eric.noul...@gmail.com:
2009/2/17 Alexander Neundorf a.neundorf-w...@gmx.net:
But a http://autoconf-archive.cryp.to/ type archive for CMake modules
would also be a good idea.
At FOSDEM we also discussed about something like this, some kind of
semi-official place where
2009/2/16 Bill Hoffman bill.hoff...@kitware.com:
Philip Lowman wrote:
A tertiary goal would be convincing the 3rd party dependencies to switch
to CMake for their native build systems.
I don't really like the propaganda idea :-)
Particularly for Open Source projects.
Open Source is about
Dear CMake users,
I am trying to use gmm++ in my code. I read somewhere on web that
FindGMM.cmake is available. I don't know from where I can download it.
I would be thankful if you share it with me or in case it is online,
let me know where/how I can get it.
Regards,
Kaveh
ps: Sorry if this is
Eric Noulard wrote:
2009/2/16 Bill Hoffman bill.hoff...@kitware.com:
Philip Lowman wrote:
A tertiary goal would be convincing the 3rd party dependencies to switch
to CMake for their native build systems.
I don't really like the propaganda idea :-)
Particularly for Open Source projects.
I wasn't able to get a copy, but it's in kde svn
/kde-svn/src/trunk/koffice/*cmake*/modules/
Kaveh Kohan wrote:
Dear CMake users,
I am trying to use gmm++ in my code. I read somewhere on web that
FindGMM.cmake is available. I don't know from where I can download it.
I would be thankful if
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Pau Garcia i Quiles
pgqui...@elpauer.orgwrote:
Hello,
I want Visual C++ to output executables, DLLs, etc to the builddir
without creating Release, Debug, RelWithDebInfo, etc
directories. In our case, this would be very convenient for debugging.
I have
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Bill Hoffman bill.hoff...@kitware.comwrote:
Also, it would be really great if we setup a dashboard for this project. I
am thinking it could all be checked out and built on a variety of
compilers/OS's nightly.
Wouldn't have it any other way. :)
--
Philip
I get a lot of these warnings (example below), because in
/usr/lib64 there are symlinks to the libGL files in
/usr/X11R6/lib64
Is there a correct (but still safe) way to make these warnings go away.
There are a lot of them (a couple per plugin - so on screen we get tens
of copies of the
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Eric Noulard eric.noul...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/2/17 Eric Noulard eric.noul...@gmail.com:
2009/2/17 Alexander Neundorf a.neundorf-w...@gmx.net:
But a http://autoconf-archive.cryp.to/ type archive for CMake modules
would also be a good idea.
At FOSDEM
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Eric Noulard eric.noul...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/2/16 Bill Hoffman bill.hoff...@kitware.com:
Philip Lowman wrote:
A tertiary goal would be convincing the 3rd party dependencies to switch
to CMake for their native build systems.
I don't really like the
43 matches
Mail list logo
