The following issue has been SUBMITTED.
==
http://www.cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=15518
==
Reported By:Paul TBBle Hampson
Assigned To:
With this change, does the external project's configure step re-run
when you edit only the CMAKE_CACHE_ARGS for it?
(It did with the *.in / configure_file approach...)
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:55 AM, Andrey Pokrovskiy
wonder.m...@gmail.com wrote:
In current implementation of
On 4/16/2015 6:15 PM, Domen Vrankar wrote:
I'm not certain that trying to squeeze the tests described above into
RunCMake is the right way to go.
[snip]
Would it be OK if I add something like CPackSemanticTests (I'm bad
with names) into Tests directory and implement it similarly to
RunCMake
Le 16/04/15 22:31, Brad King a écrit :
On 04/16/2015 04:19 PM, Domen Vrankar wrote:
I've pushed the patch with minor changes to next.
http://www.cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;h=0779b679
Thanks. The fixup! mark is useful only during incremental
development of an open topic. Once a commit is
On 04/16/2015 05:54 AM, Tamás Kenéz wrote:
I think the main challenge will be how to format error messages when
neither mode finds anything for a REQUIRED package.
We can pretend they failed in the usual module;config order. So the
wordings of the messages may remain as they are.
The
Le 17/04/15 15:50, Raffi Enficiaud a écrit :
Le 16/04/15 22:31, Brad King a écrit :
On 04/16/2015 04:19 PM, Domen Vrankar wrote:
I've pushed the patch with minor changes to next.
http://www.cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;h=0779b679
Thanks. The fixup! mark is useful only during incremental
The following issue has been SUBMITTED.
==
http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=15519
==
Reported By:chenliang xu
Assigned To:
Are you interested in working on a patch for this?
Yes, I'd give it a try. I signed up to Mantis, account: tamas.kenez so
you can assign it to me. I guess that's the next step.
Thanks,
Tamas
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 04/16/2015 05:54 AM, Tamás
