Hi,
I agree that it should be total number of cores. In addition,
cmake_host_system_information() might be extended to provide the number of
cores per physical core.
This aligns with the information in the XML procuded by CTest: The Site
element has the attributes NumberOfLogicalCPU,
Hi,
This question comes from https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/issues/16594
Currently cmake_host_system_information(RESULT logical QUERY
NUMBER_OF_LOGICAL_CORES) is buggy, some parts of the code that implement
it assume it refers to the number of cores in the system and some assume
it is
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:41:21 -0500, Paul Smith wrote:
> IMO the right place for managing relocatable builds is in the
> compiler/linker, not in the build tool.
This is about making the files CMake writes relocatable, not the
resulting binaries.
--Ben
--
Powered by www.kitware.com
Please
IMO the right place for managing relocatable builds is in the
compiler/linker, not in the build tool.
The compiler/linker should provide options that allow the output to be
relocatable regardless of the contents of the command line. GCC for
example has -fdebug-prefix-map that will allow you to
Thank you for the warning and support. We would prefer to not maintain
a fork, but I have not been able to find any other technology
that is suitable.
For future reference. The intended use-case is for CMake to act
as an engine in an IDE project generator solution similar to the below
On 01/26/2017 05:57 AM, Bøe, Sebastian wrote:
> I will investigate relocatable builds, because in spite of this not being
> trivial, I think CMake still comes out as the best suited technology for my
> use-case.
We once had an option to produce relative paths in the build system
and it was a
I was not aware that this was a non-goal. Thank you
for feedback.
I am sorry if my use-case sounds foreign, but I can't use cmake server mode,
because I can't modify the IDE.
I will investigate relocatable builds, because in spite of this not being
trivial, I think CMake still comes out as the
On 01/26/2017 10:45 AM, Tobias Hunger wrote:
Hello CMake developers,
I have been using Qt Creator extensively with cmake server-mode for a
while now and am very happy with the results so far. Once the project
is initially configured by cmake it is really nice.
Today I started to look into a
Hello CMake developers,
I have been using Qt Creator extensively with cmake server-mode for a
while now and am very happy with the results so far. Once the project
is initially configured by cmake it is really nice.
Today I started to look into a bug report that creator behaves
horribly when not
