[cmake-developers] [CMake 0015799]: Way to pass git options for cloning in ExternalProject_Add

2015-10-19 Thread Mantis Bug Tracker
The following issue has been SUBMITTED. == https://cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=15799 == Reported By:gonzalob...@gmail.com Assigned To:

Re: [cmake-developers] [Review Request] New module: IncludeUrl

2015-10-19 Thread Daniele E. Domenichelli
Hello Brad, On 12/10/2015 17:00, Brad King wrote: >> I understand this is a quite controversial module, but I would like to >> stress that this is something that can already be done using CMake just >> by executing file(DOWNLOAD) and include(), this module just makes it >> easy to do it. Whether

[cmake-developers] [CMake 0015801]: FindCUDA.cmake incorrectly includes cu file dependencies

2015-10-19 Thread Mantis Bug Tracker
The following issue has been SUBMITTED. == https://cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=15801 == Reported By:tomwar Assigned To:

Re: [cmake-developers] Add command line options for deprecation message control

2015-10-19 Thread Brad King
On 10/18/2015 07:59 AM, Michael Scott wrote: > I was thinking of coming back to issue of the deprecation and author > message options, now that CMake 3.4 has been released, is now a suitable > time for it? Yes. Early in the development cycle is best. > We modify cmake::IssueMessage to check

Re: [cmake-developers] Filesystem timestamp checks

2015-10-19 Thread Brad King
On 10/15/2015 03:58 PM, Ruslan Baratov wrote: > 3. Apply changes to CMakeLists.txt "immediately", CMakeLists.txt modification > time 105 > 4. Run rebuild: `cmake --build _builds`. Since CMakeLists.txt (105) is not > "newer" > then Makefile (105) there will be no regenerate command run and

Re: [cmake-developers] CMakeForceCompiler

2015-10-19 Thread Brad King
On 10/19/2015 10:46 AM, Brad King wrote: > CMakeForceCompiler: Deprecate this module and its macros > https://cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;a=commitdiff;h=5908dcb6 After fixing a typo in the commit message: CMakeForceCompiler: Deprecate this module and its macros

Re: [cmake-developers] CMakeForceCompiler

2015-10-19 Thread Brad King
On 09/22/2015 04:39 PM, Brad King wrote: > I think it should be deprecated if possible. First we must > provide alternatives for all its use cases though. I'm not familiar with any cases that cannot be supported in other ways so I decided to deprecate the module now: CMakeForceCompiler:

Re: [cmake-developers] CMakeForceCompiler

2015-10-19 Thread Brad King
On 10/19/2015 10:46 AM, Brad King wrote: > This will at least call attention to the problems with this > module and hopefully bring to light any remaining use cases > that require it. For reference, an additional problem is discussed here: https://cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=15797#c39641 The

Re: [cmake-developers] CMakeForceCompiler

2015-10-19 Thread Stephen Kelly
Brad King wrote: > On 10/19/2015 10:46 AM, Brad King wrote: >> CMakeForceCompiler: Deprecate this module and its macros >> https://cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;a=commitdiff;h=5908dcb6 > > After fixing a typo in the commit message: > > CMakeForceCompiler: Deprecate this module and its macros

Re: [cmake-developers] CMakeForceCompiler

2015-10-19 Thread Brad King
On 10/19/2015 03:02 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote: > You're using message(DEPRECATION) - no one will see the warning message you > added. At least now we can point at the documentation when someone asks about it. > I think message(DEPRECATION) is broken by design and should not be used > until it

Re: [cmake-developers] Filesystem timestamp checks

2015-10-19 Thread Ruslan Baratov via cmake-developers
On 19-Oct-15 19:30, Brad King wrote: On 10/15/2015 03:58 PM, Ruslan Baratov wrote: 3. Apply changes to CMakeLists.txt "immediately", CMakeLists.txt modification time 105 4. Run rebuild: `cmake --build _builds`. Since CMakeLists.txt (105) is not "newer" then Makefile (105) there will be no