and there, so I don't think there will be a
review burden soon.
Thanks,
Steven
On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Steven Velez <sbv1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> After spending some time trying to figure out how to affect the build
> "destination", it seems that destinations associated
nd this should print a warning... but if
order of processing the schemes/targets cannot match source order,
then perhaps it should be noted that what is "last" cannot be
guaranteed
Thanks,
Steven
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Steven Velez <sbv1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks
that was a bad assumption.
Will try to have that thought out soon.
Thanks,
Steven
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 9:05 AM, Gregor Jasny <gja...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hello Steven,
>
> On 9/22/17 3:36 AM, Steven Velez wrote:
>> # Property-Centric
>> In this proposal, the gen
* XCODE_SCHEME_LAUNCH_ENVIRONMENT
OR
The configure_file function can be augmented to be runnable during
generation so that it can process generator expressions which are
defined to support this scheme-customization workflow.
Thanks,
Steven
On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Steven Velez <sbv1...@gmail.com>
bility of implementing such
a solution
Thanks,
Steven
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Steven Velez <sbv1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sure.. but I haven't even thought about it much yet. So when that has
> happened, I'll make a more formal proposal.
>
> Thanks,
> Steven
>
>
suppose the experts should chime in.
Steven
On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 4:07 AM, René J.V. Bertin <rjvber...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Friday September 15 2017 16:51:24 Steven Velez wrote:
>
> >Yeah... I didn't mean to respond personally... i didn't realize my client
> >was doing that
Sure.. but I haven't even thought about it much yet. So when that has
happened, I'll make a more formal proposal.
Thanks,
Steven
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Brad King <brad.k...@kitware.com> wrote:
> On 09/15/2017 10:55 AM, Steven Velez wrote:
> > I am assuming that the l
Hello,
I am assuming that the lack of response indicates that there has not been
much thought or interest expressed along this dimension of the feature.
Would a better way to approach this be to implement a prototype and create
a WIP MR?
Thanks,
Steven
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Steven
Hello All,
I recently noticed that 3.9.1 added the ability for the XCode generator to
also generate scheme files. This is great as we have been post processing
generator output to add schemes according to our standards, but are
discovering various issues with this approach.
However, the current
If I understand correctly the purpose of the ZERO_CHECK target is to update
the generated project files when necessary.
That's fine, but I have noticed on Xcode (8.2) that when ZERO_CHECK runs
and updates the project, it causes the xcode build to abort.
Unfortunately, it seems this build abort
ike to see the value of CMAKE_PROJECT_NAME.
Any tips?
Thanks,
Steven
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Steven Velez <sbv1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The docs say:
>
> View mode only.
>>
>> Only load the cache. Do not actually run configure and generate steps.
>>
>
>
The docs say:
View mode only.
>
> Only load the cache. Do not actually run configure and generate steps.
>
But I wonder what you can do with cmake after that to view the cache?
The -L parameter seems to display the same set of variables with or without
this set, and scripts run in process
Ah... good idea. I should have considered that. Thanks.
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Clinton Stimpson clin...@elemtech.com
wrote:
On Friday, October 10, 2014 12:43:53 PM Steven Velez wrote:
Forgive me if this question has been answered before but with CMAKE
2.8.12
(I believe) xcode
Forgive me if this question has been answered before but with CMAKE 2.8.12
(I believe) xcode builds on OS X started generating shared libraries
decorated with the VERSION target property and symlinked by a bare dylib
name and one decorated with the SOVERSION.
I understand this is common practice
this (
projectname_SOURCE_DIR and projectname_BINARY_DIR ) are implicitly
read-only. Would there be a reason to avoid my proposal?
Thanks,
Steven
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:34 AM, Steven Velez sbv1...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
We have noticed, that using the VS_SCC_* target properties, we can
bind to a perforce SCM
Just a guess, but the docs for option state:
option(option_variable help string describing option
[initial value])
Provide an option for the user to select as ON or OFF. If no initial
value is provided, OFF is used.
In this description is not optional, but the initial value is. In
...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Steven Velez sbv1...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Robert,
I reviewed the patch, and I am not sure vsAuxPath should be a
requirement. As I stated earlier, we've gotten the binding to work
acceptably without it and I assume others have as well. Further
Hi Robert,
I don't pretend to know everything there is to know about Visual
Studio SCC integration, but I have gotten this to work before with a
bit of trial and error, and reverse-engineering the entries visual
studio creates for these properties.
To answer your most recent question, there is
Hi All,
We have noticed, that using the VS_SCC_* target properties, we can
bind to a perforce SCM server. However, the way that SCC works the
perforce plugin has to prompt the user for connection information.
When we were doing this with hand-made visual studio solutions, we
would only be
Hi Robert,
I reviewed the patch, and I am not sure vsAuxPath should be a
requirement. As I stated earlier, we've gotten the binding to work
acceptably without it and I assume others have as well. Further, some
users may prefer to enter their connection information in to the
perforce dialog on
Hello All,
This is a one time message to publicize the availability of a project
of my own creation that will add CMake language-specific features to
visual studio.
The project home page is hosted on google code:
http://code.google.com/p/vissemee/
I have just made the first binary build
http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=12299
___
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 CMake FAQ at:
Since no one has yet replied, I will comment that this workflow is
much like what Qt does with the moc (meta-object-compiler) and uic
tools. Looking at the FindQt4.cmake and the referenced
Qt4Macros.cmake files, it seems like these could provide some
examples to follow...
... though its true
Cole david.c...@kitware.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Steven Velez sbv1...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
After having searched the cmake web site and wiki, I have been unable
to find a documented procedure for submitting patches to CMake. Via
brwosing the bug tracker and watching
Hi All,
After having searched the cmake web site and wiki, I have been unable
to find a documented procedure for submitting patches to CMake. Via
brwosing the bug tracker and watching this list, it seems generally
apparent that a non-committer who wants to make a contribution simply
opens an
I'd like to know the same. Particularly with respect to whether any
documents will need to be signed, and for how much longer patches
(that aren't bug fixes) will be accepted to 2.8.5.
Thanks,
Steven
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 1:53 AM, J Decker d3c...@gmail.com wrote:
so what is the proper way for
26 matches
Mail list logo
