On 07/22/2010 02:17 PM, Marcel Loose wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> That sounds like a good solution. It is probably the cleanest way to
> solve this controversy. OTOH, it adds two extra keywords that, of
> course, are not used in existing (now sometimes failing) Find macros.
> IMHO, solving the issue by ch
Am Tuesday 03 August 2010 schrieb Robert Valkenburg:
> Hi,
>
> This could
well be a silly question. I'm having some issues with
> execute_process() on
windows platforms. Below is a small test program with
> output on windows
and linux. The only command i can get to work on windows
> is "hostname
Personally I'd add
set(CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE "Debug" CACHE STRING
"Set build type")
set_property(CACHE CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE PROPERTY STRINGS
"Debug" "Release" "MinSizeRel" "RelWithDebInfo")
to my root project, and select option release default... or as part of
the build.
think -DC
Hi,
This could well be a silly question. I'm having some issues with
execute_process() on windows platforms. Below is a small test program with
output on windows and linux. The only command i can get to work on windows
is "hostname", everything else i've tried gives the output below (internal
an
2010/8/2 Clinton Stimpson :
>>
>> Waiting for feedback before going on
>
> So I wondered if we were basically getting 3 modes out of this:
>
> 1. put multiple components in one components aware package (nsis,
> packagemaker,...).
> 2. put multiple components in one non-component aware package (tar
On Monday 02 August 2010, Martin Wodok wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm new to CMake, but have of course already searched for a solution on
> the web. I often found the info that CMake doesn't strip the binaries,
> but no solution to that.
> So is there a way to get the Release (and not the debug) build
On Monday 02 August 2010, Eric Noulard wrote:
> 2010/8/1 Dennis Schridde :
> > Hello!
> >
> > I just started experimenting with CPack. According to the docs and
> >
> > code it is to be used like this:
> >> set(CPACK_... ...)
> >
> > include(CPack)
> >
> > This, however, does not allow making use o
On Monday 02 August 2010, Mark Constable wrote:
> On 2010-08-01, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > Hi, I've done some googling but came up with nothing
> > > so just wondering if anyone here knows of a tool to
> > > convert python waf based projects to Cmake?
> >
> > I don't think so, waf is not too
The following change to the 2.8.0 code did NOT fix the problem
diff --git a/Source/kwsys/System.c b/Source/kwsys/System.c
index 5d178bf..99e01cd 100644
--- a/Source/kwsys/System.c
+++ b/Source/kwsys/System.c
@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ static int kwsysSystem_Shell__CharNeedsQuotesOnUnix(char
c)
static in
Hello all,
I'm new to CMake, but have of course already searched for a solution on
the web. I often found the info that CMake doesn't strip the binaries,
but no solution to that.
So is there a way to get the Release (and not the debug) build to
produce a stripped binary (under Linux when the Makef
Hello all,
I'm new to CMake, but have of course already searched for a solution on
the web. I often found the info that CMake doesn't strip the binaries,
but no solution to that.
So is there a way to get the Release (and not the debug) build to
produce a stripped binary (under Linux when the Makef
Hello all,
I'm new to CMake, but have of course already searched for a solution on
the web. I often found the info that CMake doesn't strip the binaries,
but no solution to that.
So is there a way to get the Release (and not the debug) build to
produce a stripped binary (under Linux when the Makef
On Monday 02 August 2010 17:09:09 Clinton Stimpson wrote:
> On 08/02/2010
09:02 AM, Michael Wild wrote:
> > I didn't look into the source code, but
looks like there is some REGEX
> > REPLACE which is too simplistic. Probably
there is a missing escape for
> > the . character, thus making it also mat
On Monday 02 August 2010 17:09:09 Clinton Stimpson wrote:
> On 08/02/2010
09:02 AM, Michael Wild wrote:
> > I didn't look into the source code, but
looks like there is some REGEX
> > REPLACE which is too simplistic. Probably
there is a missing escape for
> > the . character, thus making it also mat
On 08/02/2010 09:02 AM, Michael Wild wrote:
On 2. Aug, 2010, at 16:44 , Dennis Schridde wrote:
Hello!
I setup include_directories and then call qt4_wrap_cpp for a set of
files. What I am seeing now is that the set of -I flags for moc are
different from those for the
compiler:
include_dire
On 2. Aug, 2010, at 16:44 , Dennis Schridde wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I setup include_directories and then call qt4_wrap_cpp for a set of
> files. What I am seeing now is that the set of -I flags for moc are
> different from those for the
> compiler:
>
> include_directories(/a/b/c/lib/mylib/framework
On Monday 02 August 2010 16:44:42 Dennis Schridde wrote:
> My first guess is
that CMake detects the pattern lib/mylib/framework as
> something special,
strips the mylib/framework part, and thus screws up.
P.S: This seems to be a
correct guess. Creating a symlink "src -> framework" and using that in
Hello!
I setup include_directories and then call qt4_wrap_cpp for a set of
files. What I am seeing now is that the set of -I flags for moc are
different from those for the
compiler:
include_directories(/a/b/c/lib/mylib/framework)
qt4_wrap_cpp(MOC
testfile.hpp)
[<< Commandlines shortened for read
On Aug 2, 2010, at 5:29 AM, Eric Noulard wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I did add a patch for the "multiple file problem"
> http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=10736
>
> May be interested people can have a try and comment
> this patch.
>
> It adds the possibility for any CPack generators to gener
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 3:58 AM, Dennis Schridde wrote:
> On Monday 02 August 2010 04:03:09 David Cole wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at
> 6:17 PM, Eric Noulard wrote:
> >>> [...]
> > > My
> personal point of view with your idea is that
> > > since we most most
> probably want to maintain backwar
I can think of two ways to address a problem like this.
1) Serialize access to the "central file" by establishing dependencies among
all the writers to the central file. Make your nth call depend on n-1, n-1
on n-2, ... 3 on 2, 2 on 1. That forces the steps that access the file to
run serially and
Hi All,
I did add a patch for the "multiple file problem"
http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=10736
May be interested people can have a try and comment
this patch.
It adds the possibility for any CPack generators to generate multiple file.
It adds "preliminary" support for component to al
On Monday 02 August 2010 00:17:53 Eric Noulard wrote:
> My personal point of
view with your idea is that
> since we most most probably want to maintain
backward compatibility
> it would even be better if we can do
>
> 1 -
set(CPACK_...
> 2 - include(CPack)
> 3 - set(CPACK_...)
> 4 -
cpack_update_c
2010/8/2 David Cole :
> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Eric Noulard wrote:
>>
>> 2010/8/1 Dennis Schridde :
>> > Hello!
>> >
>> > I just started experimenting with CPack. According to the docs and
>> > code it is to be used like this:
>> >> set(CPACK_... ...)
>> >>
>> > include(CPack)
>> >
>> > T
On Monday 02 August 2010 04:03:09 David Cole wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at
6:17 PM, Eric Noulard wrote:
>>> [...]
> > My
personal point of view with your idea is that
> > since we most most
probably want to maintain backward compatibility
> > it would even be better
if we can do
> >
> > 1 - set
Hi! I have a project, where for some targets I have a POST_BUILD rule, which
adds some data about this target into a "central file". If I build a project
with several threads sometimes I get errors, when both threads try to write
into this "central file" at the same time.
So I was wondering, if
26 matches
Mail list logo
