Re: cmake

On Wed, 16 Dec 2015, John Spray wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Sage Weil wrote: > > The work to transition to cmake has stalled somewhat. I've tried to use > > it a few times but keep running into issues that make it unusable for me. > > Not having make check is a

Re: cmake

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Sage Weil wrote: > The work to transition to cmake has stalled somewhat. I've tried to use > it a few times but keep running into issues that make it unusable for me. > Not having make check is a big one, but I think the hackery required to >

Re: cmake

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Sage Weil wrote: > The work to transition to cmake has stalled somewhat. I've tried to use > it a few times but keep running into issues that make it unusable for me. > Not having make check is a big one, but I think the hackery required to >

Re: cmake

Hi, responding to all these at once. - Original Message - > From: "Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub" <yeh...@redhat.com> > To: "Sage Weil" <sw...@redhat.com> > Cc: "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org> > Sent: Wednesday, December

Re: cmake

Hi, On 16/12/2015 18:33, Sage Weil wrote: > The work to transition to cmake has stalled somewhat. I've tried to use > it a few times but keep running into issues that make it unusable for me. > Not having make check is a big one, but I think the hackery required to > get that going points to

Re: cmake

On 16-12-2015 19:45, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote: > Is cmake a viable option in all environments we expect ceph (or any > part of) to be compiled on? (e.g. aix, solaris, freebsd, different > linux arm distros, etc.) Hi, For FreeBSD it does not really matter much. Recently the native builder has

Re: cmake

On 16-12-2015 20:38, Sage Weil wrote: > On Wed, 16 Dec 2015, Matt Benjamin wrote: >> I'm going to push for cmake work already in progress to be moved to the >> next milestone ASAP. >> >> With respect to "make check" blockers, which contains the issue of where >> cmake puts built objects. Ali,

Re: cmake

On Thu, 3 Dec 2015 19:26:52 -0500 (EST) Matt Benjamin wrote: > Could you share the branch you are trying to build? (ceph/wip-5073 would not > appear to be it.) It's the trunk with a few of my insignificant cleanups. But I found a fix: deleting the CMakeFiles/ and

Re: cmake

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 3:59 AM, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > On Thu, 3 Dec 2015 19:26:52 -0500 (EST) > Matt Benjamin wrote: > >> Could you share the branch you are trying to build? (ceph/wip-5073 would >> not appear to be it.) > > It's the trunk with a few of

Re: cmake

I always run cmake from a build directory which is not the root, usually "build" in the root, so my minimal invocation would be "mkdir build; cd build; cmake ../src"--I'd at least try that, though I wouldn't have thought build location could affect something this basic (and it would be a bug).

Re: cmake

sorry, "cmake .." for Ceph's setup. Matt - Original Message - > From: "Matt Benjamin" <mbenja...@redhat.com> > To: "Pete Zaitcev" <zait...@redhat.com> > Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org > Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2015 5:30:28 PM >

Re: cmake

el.org > Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2015 7:03:47 PM > Subject: Re: cmake > > On Thu, 3 Dec 2015 17:30:21 -0500 > "Adam C. Emerson" <aemer...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On 03/12/2015, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > > > > I'm trying to run cmake, in o

Re: cmake

On Thu, 3 Dec 2015 17:30:21 -0500 "Adam C. Emerson" wrote: > On 03/12/2015, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > > I'm trying to run cmake, in order to make sure my patches do not break it > > (in particular WIP 5073 added source files). Result looks like this: > > > > [zaitcev@lembas

Re: CMake blueprint

On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Casey Bodley ca...@linuxbox.com wrote: Hi Ilya, Regarding the CMake blueprint at http://wiki.ceph.com/Planning/Blueprints/Giant/CMake, we at The Linux Box are excited to see more interest! I know that we've made several improvements to the CMakeLists on