Alan W. Irwin wrote: >I tried CMake-2.4.6 on my Debian stable system, and it appears to work as >well as 2.4.5. I suggest you try 2.4.6 for yourselves to make sure it is >fine on all platforms. We don't want to get caught by surprise by some >introduced platform incompatibility in 2.4.6 since that version is now the >only advertised 2.4.x download available for new CMake users. > >However, I plan to leave the minimum version at 2.4.5 because I don't see >any compelling new feature in 2.4.6 (such as one that will remove cmake >bug workarounds for us). > >Just to review, those key workarounds are still the following: > >(1) "make package" still does not work so we still must use the "make > install DESTDIR=whatever" command followed by the appropriate tar or zip > command to make a binary package. > >(2) We still must continue to include Arjen's Windows-df.cmake and > Windows-f90.cmake modules in cmake/modules/Platform since they have not > been accepted (for unknown reasons) in 2.4.6. > > Pity - it would make life a bit easier for Fortran programmers.
>(3) We must replace " use " by " use_" for all f77 comment lines in bindings > and examples because CMake has a bug which parses those comment lines > for "use" commands to determine module dependencies. This is cmake bug > 3109. > >(4) We must create a file with arbitrary contents called plplot.mod.proxy in > the top-level directory to satisfy a cmake issue which completely screws > up fortran 95 module dependencies even when there are no "use" commands > being improperly parsed from fixed-form comments. This is cmake bug > 3984. > >I plan to follow up on (1) so that the trivial fix (using make install with >DESTDIR internally in cmake) will be in the next version of cmake, and I >hope Arjen does the same for issue (2). > > I will bring the issue up again in the CMake list. >Arjen was actually involved in the final decision about how issue (3) (bug >3109) should be fixed, but something went awry with the one-line change (the >parser went into an infinite loop according to the CMake developer) so he >gave up. Arjen, would you be willing to re-ignite this issue with a test to >see why the one-line fix did not work? It would be great to get this >resolved since I would like to see those ugly forced changes in the comment >lines removed. > > > I will look into this too. I can not remember what the fix was, but I still have the correspondence about this. Regards, Arjen ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Plplot-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plplot-devel
