Hi Cory, thanks for link to the developer mailing list discussion. I think CMake 3.3 is better then 3.5, because at least the last Leap 42.1 release provides that. I patched ParaView to require CMake 3.0 and it builds fine. I will package ParaView 5.1 that way and hope you reduce the requirement to CMake 3.3 for the next time.
> Based on that discussion, loosening the requirement to CMake 3.0 does > not appear to be feasible. CMake 3.0 helped to clean some code paths, nothing really complicated. You have to check whether you can get other improvements from newer CMake version by copying the relevant parts and calling that instead of the built-in functions. So 3.0 might be feasible and reasonable. Bye Christoph _______________________________________________ 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 Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
