Re: [CMake] Should header files be listed for a target?

On Mittwoch, 11. September 2019 21:22:04 CEST Kyle Edwards via CMake wrote: > On Wed, 2019-09-11 at 22:00 +0300, Avraham Shukron wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 9:49 PM Kyle Edwards > > > m> wrote: > > > You can list them or not list them. CMake will recognize them as > > > header > > > files

Re: [CMake] Install without building unittests

On 2019 M03 28, Thu 18:22:03 CET Scott Bloom wrote: > Just a note, for google later on…  > > The default appears to have the variable unset, so it doesn’t show up in the > list of variables in ccmake or the cmake-gui. > I also added it to my system before any INSTALL command was called. I

Re: [cmake-developers] [CDT] Improving CDT4 generator

On 2019 M03 20, Wed 13:53:49 CET Brad King via cmake-developers wrote: > On 3/19/19 4:57 PM, David wrote: > > since Eclipse 9.2 (or 9.1 do not remember), the CMake CDT4 Generator > > does not work as expected for C++ Project. > > > > What is the best way to propose an update ? > > Please see

Re: [cmake-developers] Fwd: [CMake] link only with targets feature

On 2019 M02 12, Tue 08:34:57 CET Timothy Wrona wrote: > I saw this email come through the cmake users mailing list but feel it is > more fitting for it to go to cmake-developers so I'm forwarding it here. > > It is a pretty long rant, but I think his idea to add a keyword to the >

Re: [CMake] link only with targets feature

On 2019 M02 12, Tue 08:02:43 CET Starka Tomáš wrote: > tldr; > It would be wonderful to have function or signature for > target_link_libraries tha would link only to a targets. Did I overlook > something? > > like target_link_libraries(name [PUBLIC...] TARGETS myFavouriteLib ... > QUIET/VERBOSE)

Re: [CMake] List all packages

On 2019 M01 13, Sun 09:43:03 CET Lectem wrote: > Hi, > > Is there a way to list all the packages (both config files and find-modules) > that find_package could find ? Could we even imagine this would also permit > to list the variables and targets created in it ? I think that would be a > very

Re: [CMake] Removing RPATH from existing binaries

On 2019 M01 5, Sat 08:06:31 CET Federico Milano wrote: > Hi. When packaging my application, I'm using install (FILES...) to copy > some third party executables to my binary folder. > > 1. I do not know if I'm doing it right or if I should use install > (PROGRAMS...) > 2. Some of the binaries have

Re: [cmake-developers] CMake Cache Library

On 2018 M11 12, Mon 17:53:38 CET Taylor Holberton wrote: > Hello everyone! > > Today I released a short and sweet C++ library for accessing and modifying > CMake Cache files. > > Feel free to use it, critique it, or ignore it entirely. > > You can find it on GitHub, at

Re: [CMake] Default library name?

On 2018 M11 5, Mon 13:20:32 CET Robert Maynard wrote: > Yes, you can do that. I don't know if there is an easier way than the > following: you could have a look at the following variables: CMAKE_STATIC_LIBRARY_PREFIX CMAKE_STATIC_LIBRARY_SUFFIX CMAKE_SHARED_LIBRARY_PREFIX

Re: [CMake] Removing rpath paths

On 2018 M10 28, Sun 18:46:24 CET you wrote: > El 28/10/18 a las 18:32, Alexander Neundorf escribió: > > well, then you do have some RPATH/RUNPATH somewhere ;-). As you say > > probably in the libraries. > > ld.so.conf could also contains additional search directories, but I

Re: [CMake] Removing rpath paths

On 2018 M10 28, Sun 14:20:40 CET you wrote: > El 28/10/18 a las 13:59, Alexander Neundorf escribió: > > On 2018 M10 28, Sun 10:19:58 CET Gonzalo Garramuño wrote: > > ... > > > >> 3) Why does running 'readelf -d myexecutable | grep RPATH' returns > >&g

Re: [CMake] Removing rpath paths

On 2018 M10 28, Sun 10:19:58 CET Gonzalo Garramuño wrote: ... > 3) Why does running 'readelf -d myexecutable | grep RPATH' returns nothing only grep for "PATH", then you also get the newer RUNPATH entry. Alex -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake

Re: [CMake] protobuf and imports relative to root (and --proto_path)

On 2018 M09 25, Tue 16:53:27 CEST David Jobet wrote: > > What I do have a problem is rerunning protoc automatically on proto-files > > which import proto files that have been modified. > > How do you handle this ? > > I just found out I don't. > Any idea on that one ? here are some suggestions:

Re: [CMake] protobuf and imports relative to root (and --proto_path)

On 2018 M08 23, Thu 12:50:14 CEST David Jobet wrote: > Hello, > > I'm trying to port an existing project from premake to cmake. > I'm trying to avoid modifying the source files while doing so. > > Right now, we have several libraries (read in different directories) using > proto files with

Re: [CMake] How to build fully correctly versioned shared object files with cmake

On 2018 M08 6, Mon 21:54:33 CEST Hendrik Sattler wrote: > Am 6. August 2018 20:27:23 MESZ schrieb Philip Van Hoof : > >Hello everyone, > > > >I noticed that it sometimes happens that I find a package for a shared > >object file(s) (or DLLs, on platforms like Windows) that have a build > >set up

Re: [CMake] simple find_package example

On 2018 M08 2, Thu 10:01:39 CEST Randy Heiland wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to figure out how to modify the simple "hello" demo ( > https://cmake.org/examples/) so that the Hello project is a library with an > accompanying FindHello.cmake and then the Demo project uses that > information and

Re: [CMake] Using Different Computers for cmake and ctest

On 2018 M07 18, Wed 09:49:47 CEST Brian S wrote: > I currently use cmake/ctest to build and test my software. The software is > C++/CUDA. During the build step I don't need a GPU but in the test step I > do. I would like to build the code with cmake on a cluster with many CPUs > and then run the

Re: [CMake] Eclipse CDT4 - Unix Makefiles / Ninja Generator

On 2018 M07 7, Sat 19:09:18 CEST Martin Weber wrote: > Hi all, > > FYI, according to this [1], those generators do no longer work with the new > core build introduced in CDT 9.5. > > Martin > > [1] http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cdt-dev/msg33066.html do you know whether the new build

Re: [cmake-developers] How to handle dependencies of protobuf files ?

Hi, On 2018 M05 29, Tue 09:52:16 CEST Brad King wrote: > On 05/15/2018 03:45 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > I think to do it properly, there would have to be a dependency scanning > > for > > proto files like there is for C/C++ headers. > > In order to handle

Re: [cmake-developers] How to handle dependencies of protobuf files ?

Any comments ? Alex On 2018 M05 15, Tue 21:45:06 CEST Alexander Neundorf wrote: > Hi, > > I stumbled upon a problem with protobuf files, I attached a testcase. > There is a MyBase.proto, which is "imported" by Complex.proto. > If MyBase.proto is modified, protoc is

[cmake-developers] How to handle dependencies of protobuf files ?

Hi, I stumbled upon a problem with protobuf files, I attached a testcase. There is a MyBase.proto, which is "imported" by Complex.proto. If MyBase.proto is modified, protoc is run again in MyBase.proto, but not on Complex.proto, although it should. You can have a look at the attached example.

Re: [cmake-developers] new generator question - xml file output for embedded IDE platforms.

On 2018 M05 2, Wed 09:17:53 CEST du...@duaneellis.com wrote: > >> configure_file is not the right command > > Yea, it's the nearest existing item, and it only does the most > simplistic replacement that's why I use that as a basis for my example. > It is in effect, like the final last 'sed' step

[CMake] How to handle dependencies of protobuf files ?

Hi, I stumbled upon a problem with protobuf files, I attached a testcase. There is a MyBase.proto, which is "imported" by Complex.proto. If MyBase.proto is modified, protoc is run again in MyBase.proto, but not on Complex.proto, although it should. You can have a look at the attached example.

Re: [cmake-developers] Adding a non-make based generator

Hi, On 2018 M02 14, Wed 22:16:54 CEST Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On 2018 M02 14, Wed 18:46:52 CET Saeed, Khurram wrote: > > Thanks Alex. > > Yes it does support generating the project in the build dir. It also works > > while generating in a subdir of the source dir. Ec

Re: [CMake] How to build CMake so it works on an older Linux?

On 2018 M04 5, Thu 15:15:21 CEST Juan E. Sanchez wrote: > The example I just sent was for building in centos 6, because 5 is gone. not really gone, it's still in vault.centos.org :-) https://hub.docker.com/r/aneundorf/centos5-build-base/~/dockerfile/ Alex -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please

Re: [CMake] How to build CMake so it works on an older Linux?

On 2018 M04 5, Thu 12:50:04 CEST Ben Sferrazza wrote: > > Were you able to actually build the newer versions of Cmake that require > c++11 on Centos 5? I didn't try that. Alex -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at:

Re: [CMake] How to build CMake so it works on an older Linux?

On 2018 M04 5, Thu 21:24:40 CEST Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On 2018 M04 5, Thu 16:15:17 CEST suzuki toshiya wrote: > > Dear Eric, > > > > # if anybody think "how C++11 environment should be prepared > > # on legacy GNU/Linux" is off-topic and should be discu

Re: [CMake] How to build CMake so it works on an older Linux?

On 2018 M04 5, Thu 16:15:17 CEST suzuki toshiya wrote: > Dear Eric, > > # if anybody think "how C++11 environment should be prepared > # on legacy GNU/Linux" is off-topic and should be discussed > # in off-list, please let me know. I will do so. > > Eric Wing wrote: > > Thanks for the responses.

Re: [CMake] cmake --find-package deprecated?

On 2018 M04 3, Tue 16:01:58 CEST jeandet wrote: > Hi all, > > Reading the documentation I can see: > https://cmake.org/cmake/help/v3.11/manual/cmake.1.html?highlight=find%2 > 0package#find-package-tool-mode id="-x-evo-selection-start-marker"> > " > Note > > This mode is not well-supported due to

Re: [CMake] [proposal] Support for modern CMake

On 2018 M03 20, Tue 21:14:30 CET Mateusz Loskot wrote: ... > Why I can not write: > > target_use(app Boost::system Boost::filesystem) > > or > > target_use_targets(app Boost::system Boost::filesystem) > > and, actually read and understand what I'm doing? > > (If you're now typing "why don't

Re: [cmake-developers] Adding a non-make based generator

On 2018 M02 14, Wed 18:46:52 CET Saeed, Khurram wrote: > Thanks Alex. > Yes it does support generating the project in the build dir. It also works > while generating in a subdir of the source dir. Eclipse version control > plugin also works (I am using git). Interesting. How did you get that

Re: [cmake-developers] Adding a non-make based generator

Hi, On 2018 M02 9, Fri 13:16:19 CET Saeed, Khurram wrote: > Hi Alex, > > I have not made it available anywhere so far. Although my target while > writing this generator was only to make it work for ReadyStart projects. > However, I think with some effort down the road it might be possible to use

Re: [cmake-developers] Adding a non-make based generator

Hi Kurram, On 2018 M02 7, Wed 12:09:54 CET Saeed, Khurram wrote: > Hi Neundorf, > This generator can only be used for generating Nucleus ReadyStart IDE > projects. It generates Eclipse CDT project files that use ReadyStart > specific plugins and configurations. I have the impression Brad was not

Re: [cmake-developers] Adding a non-make based generator

Hi Saeed, On 2018 M02 2, Fri 15:05:19 CET Saeed, Khurram wrote: > Hi, > Nucleus > ReadyStart is > an eclipse based IDE by Mentor Embedded(tm). > It is used for creating and building C/C++ based Nucleus >

Re: [CMake] [cmake] [RFC] rewriting FindMKL

On 2018 M01 22, Mon 15:16:50 CET Sik wrote: > Hello CMake users and devs, > > In openmeeg we are reviewing our MKL package finder to make it more > maintainable for ourselves and others who had adopted our solution. > Therefore I'm writing you requesting comments and feedback so that is > useful

Re: [cmake-developers] kwsysProcess threadsafety

On 2018 M01 8, Mon 10:32:22 CET Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote: > > 3) Abandon the idea to parallelize AUTOMOC/UIC > > please no ! moc is a huge bottleneck in my builds (to the point that using > verdigris instead ends up having > faster build time overall). you

Re: [CMake] RPATH for pkg-config

On 2018 M01 4, Thu 10:06:26 CET Franck Houssen wrote: ... > ... > target_include_directories(main PUBLIC ${PETSc_INCLUDE_DIRS}) > foreach(lib ${PETSc_LDFLAGS}) > target_link_libraries(main PUBLIC ${lib}) > message("target_link_libraries - lib is ${lib}") > endforeach(lib) > > foreach(dir

Re: [CMake] coding style for modules

On 2018 M01 4, Thu 05:09:54 CET Dave Milter wrote: > Hello, > > If there is some libfoo that I want to use in my project, > and this libfoo has it's own CMakeLists.txt I have 3 options to deal > with such external dependency: > > a) Treat it like every other external dependency and write cmake

Re: [CMake] RPATH for pkg-config

On 2018 M01 3, Wed 10:08:09 CET Franck Houssen wrote: > Hello, > > How to ask cmake to add a library path (coming from pc file) to rpath ? > > I checked this https://cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_RPATH_handling, but still not > working. Can somebody help ? > >> more main.cpp > > #include > > int

Re: [cmake-developers] Antwort: Re: Non supported toolchain

On 2017 M11 23, Thu 07:22:19 CET oliver.za...@egoproducts.com wrote: > Hi Alex, > > thanks for your answer. > 1. is there some guide or at least some example? > 2. Does this module needs to be in the offical build to be distributed or > is there a possibility to distribute the modules locally?

Re: [cmake-developers] Non supported toolchain

On 2017 M11 22, Wed 10:37:00 CET oliver.za...@egoproducts.com wrote: > Hi, > > i know this is the dev mailing list, but i tried to solve my problem in > the normal one (see here > https://www.mail-archive.com/cmake@cmake.org/msg57862.html) with no > success. > > In Short: i have a toolchain for

Re: [cmake-developers] Native Compilers

On 2017 M09 26, Tue 16:21:21 CEST Kevin Funk wrote: > On Monday, 25 September 2017 20:39:01 CEST Ivam Pretti wrote: > > When you use cmake-gui, below the button configure there is an option to > > choose the compiler. This compilers are alredy intalled with cmake or it > > needs to install

Re: [CMake] Feature request: change how CMake chooses compiler when Ninja is used (Windows)

On 2017 M05 27, Sat 15:49:35 CEST biologi spm wrote: > Hi CMake developers, > > When both Mingw64 GCC and MSVC is available in PATH and run cmake > -GNinja, cmake always choose GCC. I have to manually remove GCC from > PATH or type -DCMAKE_IGNORE_PATH= which is very long. you can set the CC and

Re: [cmake-developers] Feature suggestion: auto-create missing files

On 2017 M04 11, Tue 11:52:52 CEST Brad King wrote: > On 04/11/2017 11:41 AM, Petr Kmoch wrote: > > Currently, adding a new source file to a CMake-controlled project > > means doing two things: creating the file on disk, and adding it > > to the relevant CMakeList add_library() or add_executable()

Re: [CMake] cdash/ctest question

Hi John, On 2016 M01 19, Tue 07:55:27 CET Biddiscombe, John A. wrote: > Alex > > Thank you for this information. I shall test this out right away. so, did it work out ? Alex -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at:

Re: [CMake] Forcing linking compatability to old libc / libstdc++ (Linux)

On 2017 M02 3, Fri 20:32:58 CET you wrote: > FWIW, we've moved to CentOS 6 for the binaries we package and distribute > for ParaView. It's about the oldest widely deployed Linux distro that's > still actively supported (EL5 is EOL'd and most deployments have long since > moved to 6 or 7). Yes,

Re: [CMake] Forcing linking compatability to old libc / libstdc++ (Linux)

On 2017 M02 2, Thu 20:07:29 CET you wrote: > Hi Gonzalo, > > Using the dockcross/manylinux-x64 docker image should allow to build you > project out-of-the-box. > It is based on Centos5, include recent gcc, CMake, Git, etc ... > > See https://github.com/dockcross/dockcross > > In a nutshell, >

Re: [CMake] Forcing linking compatability to old libc / libstdc++ (Linux)

On 2017 M01 26, Thu 18:23:05 CET Gonzalo Garramuño wrote: > I currently own an Ubuntu Xenial 14.04.1 LTS box in which I do all my > work.I distribute a binary image viewer. However, recently one of > my users tried to run the viewer on a CentOS 7 distro and found out that > that distro libc

Re: [cmake-developers] Eclipse CDT Managed build

On 2017 M01 25, Wed 11:38:06 CET Brad King wrote: > On 01/25/2017 11:27 AM, Ben Boeckel wrote: > > not be trivial to get CMake to generate relocatable builds. > > This is also an explicit non-goal of CMake. > > >> after CMake generation the project can be configured through the IDE UI. > > That

Re: [cmake-developers] [Discussion] Down with discrimination CPack!

On 2017 M01 18, Wed 22:20:14 CET Konstantin Podsvirov wrote: > What about add to CMake language new packaging problematic scopes: > > - COMPONENT; > - COMPONENT_GROUP; > - PACKAGE; > - INSTALLER; > - REPOSITORY? that's a quite terse proposal... Alex -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please

Re: [CMake] Function declaration scope

On 2016 M11 29, Tue 14:42:49 CET Robert Bielik wrote: > Hmm.. using v3.7 the answer is no, i.e. a function declared in a subfolder > will be available in parent scope. Seems a bit odd, doesn't it ? this has been discussed here just recently... Functions and macros are global. Once they are

Re: [CMake] Adding Cmake version in online documentation

On Wednesday 09 November 2016 09:22:24 Nils Gladitz wrote: ... > You said you are not forcing your users to upgrade by setting a policy > to OLD. > Which implied that not setting the policy to OLD would force your users > to upgrade ... which it doesn't. > > >> In fact all that setting it to OLD

Re: [CMake] Adding Cmake version in online documentation

On Wednesday 09 November 2016 00:47:39 Albrecht Schlosser wrote: > On 08.11.2016 23:01 Nils Gladitz wrote: > > On 08.11.2016 20:26, Albrecht Schlosser wrote: > >> I'm a developer of a public GUI library (FLTK). In this position you > >> don't know anything about the availability of CMake versions

Re: [CMake] Splitting in multiple directories

On Tuesday 12 July 2016 09:00:43 portolan wrote: > Hello, > > I am new to Cmake and I have a pretty strange behaviour: I set my c+++ > project to work with a single CMakefile.txt, and now I am trying to have > a more proper version with a .txt for each subdirectory > > Pretty normal stuff, my

Re: [cmake-developers] daemon-mode: Project structure

On Thursday 09 June 2016 12:59:40 Tobias Hunger wrote: > Hi Milian, ... > > > "targets": > > > [ > > > { > > > "fullName":"test", > > > "name":"test", > > > "type":"GLOBAL_TARGET" > > > }, > > > > > > A

Re: [CMake] How to check if Eclipse CDT4 generated project is set up correctly?

On Monday, April 18, 2016 16:57:52 Nils Rathmann wrote: > Hi, > when I setup with the Eclipse CDT4 generator, as described here: > https://cmake.org/Wiki/Eclipse_CDT4_Generator4 > > my [Targets] folder contains virtual folders for CMakeRules, Header > Files, Object Files, Resources and Source

[Cmake-commits] CMake branch, next, updated. v3.5.2-969-g69b7868

e: 2a0451e 6e32597 Author: Alexander Neundorf <neund...@kde.org> AuthorDate: Sun Apr 17 15:41:37 2016 -0400 Commit: CMake Topic Stage <kwro...@kitware.com> CommitDate: Sun Apr 17 15:41:37 2016 -0400 Merge topic 'AddDocumentationForEclipseVariables' into next 6e32

[Cmake-commits] CMake branch, next, updated. v3.5.0-rc3-280-g892a534

ns in full, below. - Log - https://cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;a=commitdiff;h=892a53437ff2f626fdc19b568dd80eeb7a0a81a5 commit 892a53437ff2f626fdc19b568dd80eeb7a0a81a5 Merge: fda5171 aff3894 Author: Alexander Neundorf <neu

Re: [CMake] Code::blocks: parallel build from IDE

On Sunday, January 17, 2016 14:01:59 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Sunday, January 17, 2016 13:45:34 Dimitri Kaparis wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Alexander Neundorf > > <a.neundorf-w...@gmx.net>> > > wrote: > > > On Saturday, January

[Cmake-commits] CMake branch, next, updated. v3.5.0-rc3-248-g4cbf56e

ow. - Log - https://cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;a=commitdiff;h=4cbf56e98c7c3ad3365350bd7ef9314263bb8862 commit 4cbf56e98c7c3ad3365350bd7ef9314263bb8862 Merge: 564c9c7 84ccd4f Author: Alexander Neundorf <neund...@kde.org> AuthorDate: Tue Feb 23 16:45:28 2016 -0500 Commit:

Re: [cmake-developers] [Qt-creator] CMake daemon for user tools

On Monday, February 22, 2016 22:30:42 Stephen Kelly wrote: > Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote: > > There is also https://www.cevelop.com/ which is an Eclipse derivative, > > they may be interested ? > > I went all hipster reach-out.io and tweeted at them. :) looks like that's an FP7-project, so I

Re: [cmake-developers] [Qt-creator] CMake daemon for user tools

On Friday, February 19, 2016 11:36:35 Stephen Kelly wrote: > Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 22:59:36 Stephen Kelly wrote: > >> On 02/15/2016 07:24 PM, Tobias Hunger wrote: > >> > Hi Dominik, > >> > > >> > Am 15

Re: [cmake-developers] [Qt-creator] CMake daemon for user tools

On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 22:59:36 Stephen Kelly wrote: > On 02/15/2016 07:24 PM, Tobias Hunger wrote: > > Hi Dominik, > > > > Am 15.02.2016 19:01 schrieb "Dominik Haumann" > > > >: > > > 1. Wouldn't it make sense you have a developer sprint

Re: [CMake] Incorporating cmake dir into configure.ac, but it depends on a autconf-managed in-tree library

On Thursday, February 11, 2016 13:11:29 Ron wrote: > Hi, > > I am working on a project that requires libevent and libevhtp. > The latter is cmake managed, my project and libevent are autoconf managed. > > (Note that libevhtp depends on libevent, both depend on openssl, which I > rely > on the

Re: [cmake-developers] [PATCH]: CodeBlocks: improve support for different compilers

On Tuesday, February 16, 2016 10:49:24 Brad King wrote: > On 02/12/2016 03:24 AM, melven.roehrig-zoell...@dlr.de wrote: > > Just a small patch for the CodeBlocks generator > > Thanks! Applied: > > CodeBlocks: improve support for different compilers >

Re: [CMake] Finding Packages Installed in Non-Standard Locations

On Wednesday, February 03, 2016 13:08:42 Andrew Bell wrote: > If my package is installed to a non-standard location, my > Config.cmake file is currently also installed to the non-standard > location and can't be found by dependent projects. > > I see that there's export(PACKAGE ), but this

Re: [CMake] Code::blocks: parallel build from IDE

On Sunday, January 17, 2016 13:45:34 Dimitri Kaparis wrote: > On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Alexander Neundorf <a.neundorf-w...@gmx.net> > wrote: > > On Saturday, January 09, 2016 12:27:48 Dimitri Kaparis wrote: > > > Greetings, > > > > > > I'm usin

Re: [cmake-developers] Assertion hit in CMake for KDevelop on Ubuntu

On Thursday, January 14, 2016 21:31:51 Kevin Funk wrote: > On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 10:16:44 PM Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 10:16:23 Robert Dailey wrote: > > > Running version 3.2.2 on Ubuntu 15. I run the following command: > >

Re: [CMake] cdash/ctest question

On Thursday, January 14, 2016 21:51:23 Biddiscombe, John A. wrote: > Apologies for posting a cdash question question to the cmake list… > > CDash plots the run-time of tests, which is very useful indeed, but it would > be even more useful if one could output a performance related ‘time’ from a >

Re: [cmake-developers] Assertion hit in CMake for KDevelop on Ubuntu

On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 10:16:23 Robert Dailey wrote: > Running version 3.2.2 on Ubuntu 15. I run the following command: > > $ cmake .. -G"KDevelop3" -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER=gcc-4.9 > -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER=g++-4.9 -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=$config >

Re: [cmake-developers] CMake alternative language

On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 10:59:39 yann suisini wrote: > Hi, > > I'm a new user of CMake, but I just want to express my newcomer point of > view. > Honestly , I can feel the power of CMAKE, but it's a real pain to learn ... > I'm using CMAKE for an embedded platform with a non GNU compiler ,

Re: [cmake-developers] [Qt-creator] CMake daemon for user tools

he generator approach we discussed a year ago > > and explicitly says he won't work on that, so nothing will happen > > there. > > The generate-json-description approach remains a valid alternative. > Aleix's work on it got pretty far before Stephen proposed the daemon > alternative.

Re: [cmake-developers] CMake daemon for user tools

On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 23:20:14 Milian Wolff wrote: > On Montag, 11. Januar 2016 23:22:23 CET Alexander Neundorf wrote: ... > > Stephens big approach will need some time until it is ready, while such a > > (relatively) simple thing can probably be done within one release c

Re: [cmake-developers] CMake daemon for user tools

On Monday, January 11, 2016 15:59:35 Aleix Pol wrote: ... > > Hi Stephen, everyone, > I've already discussed this in private with you. I think it's a good > idea and I'd like to make sure we can benefit from this. > > I'm unsure of the feasibility of the project though. you maybe remember that

Re: [CMake] Code::blocks: parallel build from IDE

On Saturday, January 09, 2016 12:27:48 Dimitri Kaparis wrote: > Greetings, > > I'm using the "CodeBlocks - Unix Makefiles" generator under linux to create > a build tree for my project consisting of multiple executables and > libraries. > From the command line, I could use make -jN switch from

Re: [CMake] Creating relocatable export files

On Saturday, November 14, 2015 12:19:11 Nicholas Braden wrote: > Instead of using FOO_INCLUDE_DIR, I believe you should use > target_include_directories() with the INTERFACE or PUBLIC options - > this will export the include directories properly and they will be > used when someone

[cmake-developers] (Experimental) Refactored extra-generators

Hi, I spent a few hours on the extra-generators, and you can find the result here on github: https://github.com/neundorf/CMake/tree/RefactorExtraGeneratorsExperimental In this branch, the extra-generators are not tied anymore hardcoded to the generators (so the generator list is short again),

Re: [cmake-developers] Profile Cmake scripts

On Sunday, December 27, 2015 18:40:27 Dimitar Yordanov wrote: > Hi all, > > I was searching for a way to profile CMake scripts in order to find > bottlenecks and possibilities to improve performance. I found out that > someone already invested time on that [1] providing a minimal solution. The >

Re: [cmake-developers] [PATCH] CMakeParseArguments: Test suite and native implementation

On Thursday, December 17, 2015 11:12:22 Brad King wrote: > On 12/14/2015 04:52 PM, Matthias Männich wrote: > > This adds a test suite for the CMakeParseArguments module. In addition > > the second change implements cmake_parse_arguments(...) as native > > command. > > Thanks! Applied with

Re: [cmake-developers] set(CACHE) and the local scope

On Friday, December 11, 2015 14:44:39 Ben Boeckel wrote: ... > Option 3: > > set(CACHE) (and any other cache-touching behavior) does *nothing* > with the cache if a local variable by that name is defined just to clarify: and also does nothing to the local variable ? Alex -- Powered

Re: [cmake-developers] set(CACHE) and the local scope

On Wednesday, December 09, 2015 17:35:28 Ben Boeckel wrote: > Hi, > > So some behavior I was unaware of until today came up: > > set(var ON) > option(var "description" OFF) > message("var: ${var}") Assuming I wouldn't know about the subtle characteristics of normal vs. cache

Re: [cmake-developers] set(CACHE) and the local scope

On Thursday, December 10, 2015 15:26:54 Brad King wrote: > On 12/10/2015 03:20 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > >> set(var ON) > >> option(var "description" OFF) > >> message("var: ${var}") > > > > I.e. on the first run it would be O

Re: [CMake] Making CMake *not* use -isystem at all

On Monday, December 07, 2015 15:39:40 Attila Krasznahorkay wrote: > Dear All, > > I'm still debugging the performance problems of our build. But now I bumped > into another surprising thing. > > Our "highest level" packages can depend on a *lot* of low level packages. > The one I'm testing now

Re: [CMake] Best way to handle application data path for local run vs. installation

On Thursday, December 03, 2015 09:27:29 Ruslan Baratov via CMake wrote: > On 03-Dec-15 04:34, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > On Wednesday, December 02, 2015 12:27:42 Ruslan Baratov wrote: > > If RPATH was _designed_ to be patchable, tools could just do it, > > instead o

Re: [CMake] Best way to handle application data path for local run vs. installation

On Wednesday, December 02, 2015 12:27:42 Ruslan Baratov wrote: > On 02-Dec-15 05:13, Alexander Neundorf wrote: ... > > well, the RPATH entry was not designed to be patched, > > RPATH designed to be patched. And since it's a third time I'm making > this statement please pro

Re: [CMake] Best way to handle application data path for local run vs. installation

On Tuesday, December 01, 2015 07:17:35 Ruslan Baratov wrote: > On 01-Dec-15 03:51, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > On Monday, November 30, 2015 16:13:03 Ruslan Baratov via CMake wrote: > > > On 30-Nov-15 09:10, Dmitry Marakasov wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > >

Re: [CMake] Best way to handle application data path for local run vs. installation

On Monday, November 30, 2015 16:13:03 Ruslan Baratov via CMake wrote: > On 30-Nov-15 09:10, Dmitry Marakasov wrote: > > Hi! > > ... > > The best solution would be for cmake to fix path in executable file > > right after installation, something similar to what cmake does with > > rpaths. > > I

Re: [CMake] Benchmarking with CMake

On Friday, November 13, 2015 14:41:35 Nagy-Egri Máté Ferenc via CMake wrote: > Thank you all for your resonses, > > My use case is that I have a set of executables that function as unit tests. > Currently I use the return value of the .exe as a means of indicating > success, though I know there

Re: [CMake] Benchmarking with CMake

On Monday, November 09, 2015 23:21:58 Nagy-Egri Máté Ferenc via CMake wrote: > Hi! > > Can anyone tell me if CMake (or CTest) can be customized in a way to produce > decent benchmark output? An .xlsx perhaps, or something GnuPlot friendly? I > have not found any examples of CTest being

Re: [cmake-developers] Generating buildsystem metadata from CMake

Hi, On Saturday, July 25, 2015 20:33:46 Stephen Kelly wrote: > Aleix Pol wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Stephen Kelly > > > > wrote: > >> Stephen Kelly wrote: > >>> The aim is to generate a structured file containing metadata relating > >>> the buildsystem. >

Re: [CMake] Is the situation with CMake + Eclipse ever going to get any better?

Hi, On Sunday, September 27, 2015 13:29:15 Talin wrote: > I've been using CMake and Eclipse for a bunch of different projects over > the last several years. Although many aspects of both CMake and Eclipse > have improved over the years, using them together still has a lot of > problems. > > From

Re: [cmake-developers] [ANNOUNCE] DaD's House! (Beta)

On Thursday, September 10, 2015 16:02:23 Konstantin Podsvirov wrote: > The first 100 views! > The interest is there (though not great), but where are the questions and > suggestions? the web page is quite short on details... It's not an IDE, is it a set of scripts ? Alex -- Powered by

Re: [CMake] linking: absolute path vs -l

On Wednesday, September 02, 2015 22:12:39 Nico Schlömer wrote: > Indeed, > ``` > get_target_property(out ${netCDF_LIBRARIES} LOCATION) > message(${out}) > ``` > gives > ``` > /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libnetcdf.so.7.3.0 > ``` > This value appears to be set in the CMake export file > ``` >

Re: [CMake] linking: absolute path vs -l

On Wednesday, September 02, 2015 20:28:35 Nico Schlömer wrote: > Curiously, > ``` > message(${ZLIB_LIBRARIES}) > message(${netCDF_LIBRARIES}) > ``` > yields > ``` > /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libz.so > netcdf > ``` > Hm, I would have expected it the other way around. :) maybe "netcdf" is the name

Re: [CMake] linking: absolute path vs -l

On Wednesday, September 02, 2015 08:22:08 Nico Schlömer wrote: > > it uses -l if the full path is not know or if the full path is one of the > > system > library dirs > > Hm, that sound a little weird. Using `-l` appears to delegate the library > finding to the linker although CMake has already

Re: [CMake] Crawling documentation to find named argument keywords

On Monday, August 17, 2015 09:15:18 Michael Jackson wrote: > I thought there used to be a DocBook version of the documentation? At one > point I had an XML parser that used that as input to process the > documentation in the same way. the way the documentation is generated has changed with

Re: [CMake] linking: absolute path vs -l

On Friday, August 28, 2015 08:23:47 Nico Schlömer wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm curious about when CMake decides to link a library by its absolute path > and when it links using the `-l*` syntax. I came across this for the very > simple test problem > ``` > cmake_minimum_required(VERSION 3.0) >

Re: [CMake] [cmake-developers] CMake IR

On Wednesday, July 29, 2015 07:49:07 Nagy-Egri Máté Ferenc via cmake- developers wrote: ... I believe CMake is an invaluable tool, but it could do far better. 0/10 CMake users I’ve met say they are “happy” CMake users. The learning curve is steep, and the skills gained are not reusable. CMake

Re: [CMake] linking static libs into shared libs on Linux

On Tuesday, July 07, 2015 14:36:25 Steve Borho wrote: Hello, I am the technical lead for x265 (HEVC encoder) and we have used cmake successfully since the beginning of the project. There are a few rough edges that we've had to work around (uninstall rules, yasm support in MSVC, etc) but in

Re: [CMake] warn if features used that require cmake-x.y

On Friday, July 03, 2015 09:33:42 Glenn Coombs wrote: I don't think policies are sufficient. I just tried using the new target_sources command that was introduced in CMake 3.1.0 in a CMakeLists.txt file that specified cmake_minimum_required(VERSION 3.0) and it didn't warn that the

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >