On Friday 27 July 2012, David Cole wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Alexander Neundorf <neund...@kde.org> wrote: > > On Thursday 05 July 2012, David Cole wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Clinton Stimpson <clin...@elemtech.com> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > On Thursday, July 05, 2012 06:20:56 PM Alexander Neundorf wrote: > >> >> On Thursday, 5. July 2012 17:37:21 Clinton Stimpson wrote: > >> >> > On Friday, June 15, 2012 09:56:51 PM Alexander Neundorf wrote: > >> >> > > Hi, > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > attached is a small patch which sets the OBJECT_DEPENDS property > >> >> > > of > >> >> > > > >> >> > > a > >> >> > > > >> >> > > moced file to the generated moc file. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > This has the effect that before the cpp file is built, moc has > >> >> > > been > >> >> > > > >> >> > > run > >> >> > > > >> >> > > on it. We have that in KDE's version of qt4_generate_moc() this > >> >> > > way > >> >> > > > >> >> > > since 2006 and it works for us. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > In cmake's version, it was removed January 11th 2008, the removed > >> >> > > > >> >> > > call to MACRO_ADD_FILE_DEPENDENCIES(): > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > http://cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;a=commitdiff;h=510f578f8b5385 > >> >> > > 8fb > >> >> > > > >> >> > > b541c 4e7 e4731de9bfbd483 > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Now since we are trying to get rid of our custom stuff in KDE, we > >> >> > > > >> >> > > hit > >> >> > > > >> >> > > that issue when trying to build parts of KDE with FindQt4.cmake > >> >> > > from > >> >> > > > >> >> > > cmake. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Do you remember why this line was removed ? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > What do you think about adding it again, as the attached patch > >> >> > > does > >> >> > > > >> >> > > ? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Alex > >> >> > > >> >> > It was probably removed because I thought add_custom_command() > >> >> > already > >> >> > > >> >> > added the needed dependency information. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > It should already have this: > >> >> > > >> >> > mocable.h -> moc_mocable.cpp -> moc_mocable.o > >> >> > >> >> This works if the generated moc file is listed as source file for a > >> >> > >> >> target. In several places we did not do this, and relied instead on > >> >> the > >> >> > >> >> OBJECT_DEPENDS. > >> >> > >> >> Ahh, this was in places where the moc file is generated from a cpp > >> >> file, > >> >> > >> >> which includes the moc file. > >> >> > >> >> In those cases the OBJECT_DEPENDS makes it work. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> We fixed this in the meantime by adding the generated moc file to the > >> >> > >> >> source list (which is not too bad, since the developer explicitely > >> >> > >> >> names the moc file, so it is ok). > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> So, I would like to have that dependency, but I'm unsure whether it > >> >> > >> >> might have any unwanted side effects. > >> > > >> > Ah, so for the case > >> > > >> > mocable.h -> mocable.moc -> mocable.cpp (includes mocable.moc) > >> > > >> > the mocable.moc is not listed in the sources of the target. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > I can't think of any possible unwanted side effects. > >> > > >> > I agree that we need to have this patch. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > > >> > Clinton Stimpson > >> > > >> > Elemental Technologies, Inc > >> > > >> > Computational Simulation Software, LLC > >> > > >> > www.csimsoft.com > >> > > >> > -- > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > 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://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers > >> > >> If somebody pushes this to 'next' today or tomorrow, I'll make sure we > >> > >> can get it into 2.8.9-rc2. > > > > Too late now for 2.8.9 ? > > > > Alex > > Unless you tell me it's absolutely critical, and the fix is 99.9999% > safe, then, yes, it's too late. > > But 2.8.10 is right around the corner if you adopt the right viewpoint. :-)
Ok, this can wait until 2.8.10. Can the branch EclipseAddSupportForJuno still make it into 2.8.9 ? It improves the Eclipse generator by adding support for Eclipse Juno (the most recent one) and improves behaviour on Mac, and it should be completely safe. Alex
-- 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://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
