On 1/18/2017 11:56 AM, Jean-Samuel Reynaud wrote: > > For this particular point, I do exactly the same as > KICAD_SCRIPTING_MODULES option. > > But for both option (KICAD_SCRIPTING_MODULES and > KICAD_SCRIPTING_ACTION_MENU) you mean that it's better to fail the > configuration if the options are not compatibles ?
Yes! KiCad should not build an invalid configuration. The config step should fail. > > > > > Le 17/01/2017 à 20:53, Simon Wells a écrit : >> slightly off-topic (again?) but it just came to mind..... >> >> currently if option X requires Y then Y is forced on if not already >> on. is there a way to differentiate between an explicit OFF and an >> implicit OFF that we could use to force on if implicit but error if >> explicitly off. >> >> This might be useful if a user/packager/compiler is not aware that X >> requires Y but he can't/doesn't want Y for whatever reason. >> >> i am not sure how much sense i am making so an example maybe >> >> USER decides to build themselves, he doesn't want or have python but >> the action menu sounds interesting. >> USER does cmake -DKICAD_PYTHON_SCRIPTING=NO -DKICAD_ACTION_MENU=ON. >> kicad build fails due to lack of python. USER gets mad (this ones not >> too bad as he can see in build log it was forced on) >> >> if USER had python (but still didn't want it built in to kicad) >> 3months down the line USER has an issue, uses copy version info and >> wonders why PYTHON_SCRIPTING=ON when USER said no. >> >> or from a packagers perspective >> PACKAGER likes to add all new features but has a set of packages which >> don't require python >> PACKAGER does does cmake -DKICAD_PYTHON_SCRIPTING=NO -DKICAD_ACTION_MENU=ON. >> PACKAGER doesn't read log as its really long and requires effort >> PACKAGER distributes packages saying "No python required, includes action >> menus" >> USER downloads PACKAGERs package and doesn't have python and complains >> because it doesn't run >> >> Both of these would make it hard to glimpse at the cmake log unless >> the packager makes it available in the latter case to see that it was >> forced on (or dig into the source to find out why) >> >> Simon >> >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Jean-Samuel Reynaud >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> yes i was trying to subtly imply that :) >>> ok, find attached the patch with the about box updated ;) >>> >>> Regards, > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
