Ben, Any updates? We should clean this up before the release.
Utkarsh On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Burlen Loring <[email protected]> wrote: > that's how it was handled it in the past, prior the recent refactoring, > and I think that's the way to go. Where does the refactoring stand is Ben B > finished? It would be great if Ben B could clean this up, but if not I can > make a pass next week. > > Burlen > > > On 01/03/2014 11:47 AM, Utkarsh Ayachit wrote: > >> Burlen, >> >> CUDA is confusing more people than not. Also it's adding too many >> variables. A cleanup to FindCUDA.cmake is certainly in the order. >> Until then, I propose we swicth SQTK_CUDA variable to do a >> find_package(CUDA) only if SQTK_CUDA is enabled. What do you think? >> BTW, I want to tag the release soon, so we should try to keep changes >> to a minimal at this point. >> >> Utkarsh >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Burlen Loring <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hey Patrick and Ben, Thanks for the feedback. >>> >>> In this case I think it's confusing to be dumped into a separate ccmake >>> screen. I'd say it's really an issue in the FindCUDA.cmake module, which >>> does >>> >>> message("CUDA_TOOLKIT_ROOT_DIR not found or specified") >>> >>> according to the documentation a naked message command is supposed to >>> mean >>> "Important information". In this case it's not. I think this message >>> should >>> probably be downgraded to STATUS type. just my 2 cents. >>> >>> At any rate, we could avoid the problem in PV if in the plugin we used >>> >>> find_package(CUDA QUIET) >>> >>> but initially all the cuda stuff, including find_package, was controlled >>> by >>> a cache variable so that this confusing behavior could be avoided and I >>> wouldn't have to use the QUIET option because when you're actually >>> trying to >>> configure for cuda the output is helpful if things go wrong. >>> >>> Burlen >>> >>> >>> On 01/02/2014 02:01 PM, Benjamin Spencer wrote: >>> >>> You're right. I didn't realize this was just an informational message, >>> and >>> not an error that has to be resolved. After I hit that message the first >>> time, then configure a second time and hit that message again, I can >>> successfully generate the makefile. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Ben >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Patrick O'Leary < >>> [email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Ben and Burlen, >>>> >>>> On my Mac Book Pro with NVidia card, I received the same informational >>>> message but it builds if I exit the informational screen with 'e' and >>>> hit >>>> 'g'. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Patrick >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Burlen Loring <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Benjamin, >>>>> >>>>> This is of interest to me as I haven't been involved in the recent >>>>> plugin >>>>> changes and need to look through them more closely. >>>>> >>>>> You reported an informational message that is not an error. Could you >>>>> report the actual error? >>>>> >>>>> btw, I also see the message on my ATI based system, but it doesn't >>>>> prevent me from building. For example in ccmake I can press "e" to >>>>> exit the >>>>> informational screen where the message is displayed and then hit "g" to >>>>> generate the make files and go on to compile without issue. >>>>> >>>>> Burlen >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 01/02/2014 12:41 PM, Benjamin Spencer wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I'm trying to build ParaView 4.1.0-RC2 from source on Mac OS (10.8.5). >>>>> This machine does not have CUDA installed (and has no nvidia graphics >>>>> hardware). >>>>> >>>>> When running ccmake, I get this error: >>>>> >>>>> CUDA_TOOLKIT_ROOT_DIR not found or specified >>>>> >>>>> This seems to be coming from the call: >>>>> find_package(CUDA) >>>>> in >>>>> Plugins/SciberQuestToolKit/SciberQuest/CMakeLists.txt >>>>> >>>>> If I comment that line out, I can successfully compile. I'm no cmake >>>>> guru, but it seems like if I don't have CUDA installed, >>>>> find_package(CUDA) >>>>> should just set CUDA_FOUND to OFF and not require any paths to CUDA to >>>>> be >>>>> set. Maybe this is an issue with the CUDA module in CMake rather than >>>>> ParaView. I'm using the latest CMake (2.8.12.1). >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Ben >>>>> >>>>> Benjamin Spencer >>>>> Fuels Modeling and Simulation >>>>> Idaho National Laboratory >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 ParaView Wiki at: >>>>> http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView >>>>> >>>>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: >>>>> http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 ParaView Wiki at: >>>>> http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView >>>>> >>>>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: >>>>> http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 ParaView Wiki at: >>> http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView >>> >>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: >>> http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview >>> >>> >
_______________________________________________ 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 ParaView Wiki at: http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview
