On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 17:53 -0400, Bill Hoffman wrote: > Backwards compatibility may not be important to you, but to CMake it is > very important. When a developer chooses to use CMake, I want to > respect that choice, and work as hard as I can to make sure I don't > break that code. CMake has been doing this for 10 years on cygwin, > wrong or right that is how it has been done. If there is code that > builds with CMake on cygwin today, your suggested change will break that > build.
No, it will most likely *fix* it. > The policy mechanism might not be ideal but in a year or so, all of this > would go away, and the meantime the patches you have to maintain for > cygwin ports would become trivial. The patch would basically have a set > cmake version at the top. I've already waited most of a year for this to be considered, and nothing has yet to be done; we're not interested in waiting another year or more for packages to build OOTB. > I thought the command line option was a nice compromise. It's prone to errors or misconceptions, particularly if the default would be off (as you seem to imply). Bottom line: we insist that the CMake in the Cygwin distro not define WIN32. If you're prepared to handle that upstream now, great. If not, we will need to ship a patched version until this issue is rectified. How do you wish to proceed? Yaakov Cygwin Ports _______________________________________________ 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
