On Thursday 20 September 2007, Andreas Pakulat wrote: > On 19.09.07 21:31:39, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > On Wednesday 19 September 2007 20:51, Andreas Pakulat wrote: > > ... > > > Well, I also quite often execute tests manually, especially QtTest based > > > ones, because that way I can see their full output. And if I'm in > > > <builddir>/myplugin/ or <builddir>/myplugin/test its much easier to run > > > test/mytest (or ./mytest) then ../../bin/test_mytest. > > > > I didn't argue that it doesn't make any sense to have the test executables > > in > > the current dir, but that while it makes some sense OTOH it creates an ugly > > side effect. > > > > > Anyway, so far we're only 2 people who disagree, I'd say we need a 3rd > > > opinion :) > > > > Ok, it is possible per target with cmake cvs HEAD: > > > > set_target_properties(mytest PROPERTIES RUNTIME_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY wherever) > > > > If we put this in the macros for the test executables, developers who > > really > > want that can use cmake cvs (which will become 2.6.0). I use it every day, > > it's stable. > > Well, I think our devs got more important stuff to do than trying out > the latest cmake ;) So when CMake 2.6 is released and used by KDE4 then > this seems to be the best solution.
I'm the one who added the set(...) in every CMakeLists.txt but I didn't move it to the macro. So: we all agree that setting the output dir is good, and we all agree that doing it as a directory-wide side-effect is bad, we only have to agree on the fix. I'm with Andreas: *once* KDE requires cmake-2.6, let's fix the macro to use set_target_properties. This way we have no immediate regression and we fix the bug when we can fix it, i.e. when we require 2.6. -- David Faure, [EMAIL PROTECTED], sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE, Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org). _______________________________________________ Kde-buildsystem mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-buildsystem
