-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/10348/#review18828
-----------------------------------------------------------


I don't think make package is worth getting working if it will complicate the 
build files at all. Apache releases are purely source and we leave packaging to 
downstream packagers, so (with the exception of the windows packages, which 
already work as far as I know) this wouldn't be valuable to anyone.

However it is important that "make package_source" under cmake works as well as 
"make dist" under autotools. This is nearly there in my testing, but needs some 
work to either pull in the xml spec files (in the correct place) or to 
pre-generate the generated files.

- Andrew Stitcher


On April 8, 2013, 9:53 p.m., Alan Conway wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/10348/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 8, 2013, 9:53 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for qpid, Andrew Stitcher and Steve Huston.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Get cmake package working.
> 
> "make package" currently is broken, it gives lots of errors like:
> 
> CMake Error at 
> /home/aconway/qpid/build/bindings/qpid/python/cmake_install.cmake:70 (FILE):
>   file INSTALL cannot copy file
>   "/home/aconway/qpid/build/bindings/qpid/python/_cqpid_python.so" to
>   "/usr/local/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/_cqpid.so".
> Call Stack (most recent call first):
>   /home/aconway/qpid/build/bindings/cmake_install.cmake:37 (INCLUDE)
>   /home/aconway/qpid/build/cmake_install.cmake:63 (INCLUDE)
> 
> Look at the comments in the diff, they explain what I've figured out so far.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/BuildInstallSettings.cmake 1465590 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/bindings/CMakeLists.txt 1465590 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10348/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alan Conway
> 
>

Reply via email to