> Mike, first of all, thanks for your great efforts to help to improve
> FLTK.  I can understand that your redesign of CMake could only be done
> by rewriting huge parts of the code.  I'd like to have a look at it and
> try it at least in my usual environments, but I'm currently blocked by
> other work.  I noticed your submission, but didn't find any time to look
> at it :-(
>
> [snipped more text]

I'm sorry if I came off as impatient, I was merely concerned that the patch 
might be rejected because it was so big and tried to fix so much in one patch.  
I realize that all the developers are busy and will get to this when possible.  
If I had needed to split up the patch, I would have preferred to get started 
now rather than wait.

> Yes, please wait.  Or submit an additional patch that could be applied
> after your previous one, so that we can try both together.
>...
> If I understood you correctly, your current update would work with
> CMake 2.6, whilst the alternative would only work with 2.8.  Maybe it
> would be better to stay with 2.6 then, because we should probably
> support at least some older (Linux) distributions.  But I don't know
> for sure...

I have submitted two more patches, one for code cleanup and one on STR2299.

The #cmakedefine01 feature of CMake has been there since at least 2.4, but 
undocumented until 2.8.  Normally I don't like to use undocumented features, 
but since 2.6 is frozen and it is documented in 2.8, I feel better about using 
it.  Using it removes several conditionals and makes the script more 
consistent.  I installed 2.6.0 to verify this feature and found a different 2.8 
keyword had crept in.  This was fixed.

Mike

_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev

Reply via email to