Hi Cliff,

I agree, but where are those flags in the qpid source tree?

Aside from the warning exclusion flags, that is (/wdXXXX).

I've grepped about until blue in the fingers - about all I have found was:

./src/CMakeLists.txt:721:    set (CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELWITHDEBINFO "/MD /O2 /Ob2 
/D NDEBUG")

Nothing specific (that I can easily find) for Release or Debug targets.

All - 

There is a ton of MSVC stuff spread throughout the myriad of CMake 
configuration files in the QPID source base.  I was assuming we could start 
with a bare bones cmake just for the proton libraries, and add to it as needed. 
 Would it be a better approach to try to port the existing qpid cmake files 
over to proton?  That would probably involve more time than I can devote right 
now.

Opinions?

-K

----- Original Message -----
> I would personally just use the settings Steve came up with for the
> main qpid cpp build.  Those should serve us well.  The only obvious
> addition is the flag that forces C++ compilation from files named
> foo.c.
> 
> Cliff
> 
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Ken Giusti <kgiu...@redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > Ah, almost forgot:
> >
> > The patch modifies the CMakeLists.txt file by adding compiler flags
> > for the VC++ compiler.   The flags differ based on each type of
> > target build (Debug/Release/etc).
> >
> > Now, IANAVCP (I Am Not a VC Programmer), so I have no idea what the
> > appropriate flags should be for the windows build.  I've taken a
> > guess at them, based on my limited understanding of the compiler.
> >
> > If anyone can provide better settings - please let me know.  Here's
> > the current settings:
> >
> >
> >
> > CMAKE_C_FLAGS_DEBUG          "/Wall /Iinclude /MDd /Od /Zi")
> > CMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE        "/Wall /Iinclude /MD /Ox /D NDEBUG")
> > CMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELWITHDEBINFO "/Wall /Iinclude /MD /Ox /Zi")
> >
> >
> > -K
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> Ah, then this patch is for *you*!  :)
> >>
> >> It -should- fix it so you don't have to modify the project files
> >> at
> >> all, and it should fix those header files too.  You should just be
> >> able to run cmake, then pull the result into VS and build.
> >>
> >> It doesn't go so far as to run the tests though - we'll need to
> >> get
> >> the code ported first.
> >>
> >> thanks,
> >>
> >> -K
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> > I used cmake to create Visual Studio 10 projects files and
> >> > solution
> >> > workspace. Then I modified the project files to add what I
> >> > needed.
> >> > I hadn't used cmake before this project. So I'm not an expert.
> >> >
> >> > I'll be happy to have your help with creating good support for
> >> > building proton  from cmake.
> >> >
> >> > The python support definitely needs to be fixed. And I would be
> >> > happy
> >> > to have that part  working properly. I've been creating the
> >> > header
> >> > files (encodings.h and protocol.h)  and setting up the python
> >> >  to
> >> > run the tests outside of the project files. I'll look at your
> >> > changes as soon as I can.
> >> >
> >> > Mary
> >> >
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Ken Giusti [mailto:kgiu...@redhat.com]
> >> > Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 1:47 PM
> >> > To: cliffjan...@gmail.com; Mary Hinton
> >> > Cc: proton@qpid.apache.org
> >> > Subject: review request: patch to cmake for windows builds
> >> >
> >> > Hi Cliff/Mary,
> >> >
> >> > I'm trying to add support for building proton using Microsoft
> >> > Visual
> >> > C++ express.  This patch updates cmake to enable generation of
> >> > the
> >> > VC++ project files for proton.  Can you review and try it out -
> >> > let
> >> > me know what you think?
> >> >
> >> > Note that the patch only adds build support - the problems with
> >> > building proton on windows are not addressed.
> >> >
> >> > The diff can be viewed here:
> >> >
> >> > https://github.com/kgiusti/qpid-proton/compare/win7
> >> >
> >> > And the changes are on the win7 branch of my github proton repo:
> >> >
> >> > git://github.com/kgiusti/qpid-proton.git
> >> >
> >> > -K
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> 

Reply via email to