Re: [CMake] CMake bug tracker discussion

On 2010-12-09 19:23-0500 David Cole wrote: On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 7:09 PM, Alan W. Irwin wrote: On 2010-12-09 17:06-0500 David Cole wrote: Hello CMake users and devs, (And now for something completely different...) Controversial questions: - Should we eliminate the bug tracker entirely an

Re: [CMake] CMake bug tracker discussion

...Controversial questions: - Should we eliminate the bug tracker entirely and just do all discussion and patches on the mailing list? ... - Or, alternatively, should we eliminate the bulk of mailing list traffic, and insist on issues in the bug tracker being the main conversational forum for the

Re: [CMake] [cmake-developers] CMake bug tracker discussion

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Eric Noulard wrote: > 2010/12/9 David Cole : >> Hello CMake users and devs, >> >> (And now for something completely different...) >> >> Controversial questions: >> >> - Should we eliminate the bug tracker entirely and just do all >> discussion and patches on the mai

Re: [CMake] [cmake-developers] CMake bug tracker discussion

2010/12/9 David Cole : > Hello CMake users and devs, > > (And now for something completely different...) > > Controversial questions: > > - Should we eliminate the bug tracker entirely and just do all > discussion and patches on the mailing list? (Why have two sources of > information...?) > > - Or

Re: [CMake] CMake bug tracker discussion

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 7:09 PM, Alan W. Irwin wrote: > On 2010-12-09 17:06-0500 David Cole wrote: > >> Hello CMake users and devs, >> >> (And now for something completely different...) >> >> Controversial questions: >> >> - Should we eliminate the bug tracker entirely and just do all >> discussion

Re: [CMake] CMake bug tracker discussion

On 2010-12-09 17:06-0500 David Cole wrote: Hello CMake users and devs, (And now for something completely different...) Controversial questions: - Should we eliminate the bug tracker entirely and just do all discussion and patches on the mailing list? (Why have two sources of information...?)

Re: [CMake] CMake bug tracker discussion

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 5:06 PM, David Cole wrote: > Hello CMake users and devs, > > (And now for something completely different...) > > Controversial questions: > > - Should we eliminate the bug tracker entirely and just do all > discussion and patches on the mailing list? (Why have two sources o

[CMake] R: CMake 2.8.4 release scheduled for next month

--- Gio 9/12/10, David Cole ha scritto: > (copying a CMake developers email to > the users list, just as an FYI to > all the CMake users out here...) > > The CMake developers held a "bug triage" meeting yesterday, > and here > are some notes about it: > > We are still planning to start the rele

Re: [CMake] CMake bug tracker discussion

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 11:06 PM, David Cole wrote: > Hello CMake users and devs, > > (And now for something completely different...) > > Controversial questions: > > - Should we eliminate the bug tracker entirely and just do all > discussion and patches on the mailing list? (Why have two sources o

Re: [CMake] CMake bug tracker discussion

> I'll start the ball rolling by saying that, personally, I like the bug > tracker. I find it much easier to keep a list of issues organized and > accessible than I can with email filters and folders. But I still see > a need for both tools. > > What do you say? > I like the current system. Especi

Re: [CMake] CMake bug tracker discussion

Bug trackers make people accountable and make it easy for tasks to be delegated and tracked. BUT, someone has to take on the responsibility of assigning bugs as the come in and/or closing bugs/feature requests that aren't going to be developed on any time soon, thus keeping the number of bugs in th

[CMake] CMake bug tracker discussion

Hello CMake users and devs, (And now for something completely different...) Controversial questions: - Should we eliminate the bug tracker entirely and just do all discussion and patches on the mailing list? (Why have two sources of information...?) - Or, alternatively, should we eliminate the

Re: [CMake] CMake 2.8.4 release scheduled for next month

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Tyler Roscoe wrote: > On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 04:09:49PM -0500, David Cole wrote: >> No: we were ready to start collecting candidate bugs a month and a >> half ago. That list is now what you see on the roadmap page: >>  http://public.kitware.com/Bug/roadmap_page.php

Re: [CMake] CMake 2.8.4 release scheduled for next month

In lieu of a full fix to this bug, could the small improvement I've attached be included in the meantime? http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=11445 Ryan On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 2:37 PM, David Cole wrote: > (copying a CMake developers email t

Re: [CMake] CMake 2.8.4 release scheduled for next month

On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 04:09:49PM -0500, David Cole wrote: > No: we were ready to start collecting candidate bugs a month and a > half ago. That list is now what you see on the roadmap page: > http://public.kitware.com/Bug/roadmap_page.php Guess I got my wires crossed. I still believe the bug I

Re: [CMake] CMake 2.8.4 release scheduled for next month

That one is assigned to Bill Hoffman and he will be looking at it sometime before Jan. 10. On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Roman Wüger wrote: > Is the fix for the following bug included: > http://www.cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=4068 > > If not, when would this bug fixed, because a fix is already a

Re: [CMake] CMake 2.8.4 release scheduled for next month

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Tyler Roscoe wrote: > So are you ready to start collecting candidate bugs for 2.8.4? I > nominate this one! > > http://www.vtk.org/Bug/view.php?id=11561 > > Thanks, > tyler > No: we were ready to start collecting candidate bugs a month and a half ago. That list is

Re: [CMake] OSX_BUNDLE_PLIST Use

I'll answer my own stupid question: if (APPLE) set_target_properties(${QHDFViewer_EXE_NAME} PROPERTIES MACOSX_BUNDLE_INFO_PLIST ${QHDFViewer_BINARY_DIR}/ QHDFViewer.plist) endif() Didn't notice that "MACOSX_BUNDLE_INFO_PLIST" was a property and NOT a variable. Working now.

Re: [CMake] CMake 2.8.4 release scheduled for next month

Is the fix for the following bug included: http://www.cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=4068 If not, when would this bug fixed, because a fix is already attached and the bug is open since 2006-11-23 Thanks in advance Best Regards NoRulez Am 09.12.2010 um 21:57 schrieb Tyler Roscoe : > So are you read

Re: [CMake] CMake 2.8.4 release scheduled for next month

So are you ready to start collecting candidate bugs for 2.8.4? I nominate this one! http://www.vtk.org/Bug/view.php?id=11561 Thanks, tyler On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 03:37:16PM -0500, David Cole wrote: > We are still planning to start the release candidate cycle for CMake > 2.8.4 on Wed. Jan. 12, 2

Re: [CMake] Did anyone manage to get incremental linking working with NMake generator?

On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 03:12:46PM -0500, John Drescher wrote: > > I find it to work very well.   What trouble are you having with it?  I have > > never had a problem with it, and it does save time. > > > Bill, > Sorry, I take that back, I just checked and I no longer have it > disabled in either o

[CMake] OSX_BUNDLE_PLIST Use

I have the following CMake for code for an OS X Application: SET(MACOSX_BUNDLE_INFO_STRING "${PROJECT_NAME}${DBG_EXTENSION}, Copyright 2010 BlueQuartz Software.") SET(MACOSX_BUNDLE_ICON_FILE ${ICON_FILE_NAME}) SET(MACOSX_BUNDLE_GUI_IDENTIFIER "${PROJECT_NAME}${DBG_EXTENSION}") SET(MACOSX_BU

[CMake] CMake 2.8.4 release scheduled for next month

(copying a CMake developers email to the users list, just as an FYI to all the CMake users out here...) The CMake developers held a "bug triage" meeting yesterday, and here are some notes about it: We are still planning to start the release candidate cycle for CMake 2.8.4 on Wed. Jan. 12, 2011. B

Re: [CMake] Did anyone manage to get incremental linking working with NMake generator?

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Bill Hoffman wrote: > On 12/9/2010 12:32 PM, John Drescher wrote: >>> >>> Haven't been following this thread closely, but changing the handling of >>> /INCREMENTAL is a pain, at least in VS 2005 and 2008. Here is some code >>> we use to *disable* /INCREMENTAL. With

Re: [CMake] Did anyone manage to get incremental linking working with NMake generator?

On 12/9/2010 12:32 PM, John Drescher wrote: Haven't been following this thread closely, but changing the handling of /INCREMENTAL is a pain, at least in VS 2005 and 2008. Here is some code we use to *disable* /INCREMENTAL. With a little creativity, you could probably use this to forcibly *enable*

Re: [CMake] Platform differences for ExternalProject_add URL

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 1:43 PM, KC Jones wrote: > On Dec 9, 2010, at 3:18 AM, David Cole wrote: >> What version of cmake are you using? > > I'm running 2.8.2 on Mac and 2.8.0 on Linux.  So I downloaded / built / > installed the latest 2.8.3 source on Linux. > > Now I'm getting error messages indi

Re: [CMake] Platform differences for ExternalProject_add URL

On Dec 9, 2010, at 3:18 AM, David Cole wrote: > What version of cmake are you using? I'm running 2.8.2 on Mac and 2.8.0 on Linux. So I downloaded / built / installed the latest 2.8.3 source on Linux. Now I'm getting error messages indicating libcurl does not support HTTPS: -- [ 0%] Pe

Re: [CMake] Problem using Lahey Fortran Compiler

On 12/09/2010 08:06 AM, pellegrini wrote: > I would like to build a Fortran static library using the Lahey Fortran > Compiler. [snip] > - why the compiler identification is unknown as Lahey compiler is > normally supported by CMake ? Is it really supported ? As of CMake 2.8.3 there is no suppo

Re: [CMake] Did anyone manage to get incremental linking working with NMake generator?

> Haven't been following this thread closely, but changing the handling of > /INCREMENTAL is a pain, at least in VS 2005 and 2008. Here is some code > we use to *disable* /INCREMENTAL. With a little creativity, you could > probably use this to forcibly *enable* /INCREMENTAL :): > Thanks. I look in

Re: [CMake] Did anyone manage to get incremental linking working with NMake generator?

On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 08:44:15AM -0500, Bill Hoffman wrote: > On 12/9/2010 5:26 AM, Gabriel Petrovay wrote: >> Thanks Bill for the trick. >> >> Unfortunately this works only for exe targets. >> It doesn't work for dll's. Moreover, before the link command there is >> this output: "Visual Studio No

Re: [CMake] test property COST not working in cmake 2.8.3?

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Tyler Roscoe wrote: > Ok I've added a link to this thread and the patch below to the bug: > http://www.vtk.org/Bug/view.php?id=11561 > > Without feedback from anyone, I will assume that I have done an awesome, > production-ready job and will await the call for pat

Re: [CMake] test property COST not working in cmake 2.8.3?

Ok I've added a link to this thread and the patch below to the bug: http://www.vtk.org/Bug/view.php?id=11561 Without feedback from anyone, I will assume that I have done an awesome, production-ready job and will await the call for patches to add to CMake 2.8.4. Thanks, tyler On Tue, Dec 07, 2010

Re: [CMake] providing library information, what's the cmake way

At this point of the discussion, I think that we need someone else to join. We both have made strong points for our viewpoints, and neither of us has a "perfect" solution. On Sunday 05 December 2010 12:48:49 Michael Hertling wrote: > On 12/01/2010 05:57 PM, Johannes Zarl wrote: > > On 12/01/201

[CMake] General LABELS questions

Hi, I'm trying to get LABELS/Subprojects working, having read this http://www.kitware.com/blog/home/post/11 and this http://www.kitware.com/blog/home/post/11 1. It is unclear to me whether to have LABELS working I must use CTest script (-S) or I can achieve that simply by editing of CMakeLists

Re: [CMake] Simultaneous --build-and-test and CDash submission

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Wojciech Migda wrote: > > Użytkownik  napisał(a): >> From: >> Subject: Re: [CMake] Simultaneous --build-and-test and CDash submission >> To: "Wojciech Migda" ; >> >> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Wojciech Migda  wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I have unit tests configu

Re: [CMake] Simultaneous --build-and-test and CDash submission

Użytkownik napisał(a): > From: > Subject: Re: [CMake] Simultaneous --build-and-test and CDash submission > To: "Wojciech Migda" ; > > On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Wojciech Migda wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have unit tests configured for CDash submissions. Submissions do work if > > I issue

Re: [CMake] Simultaneous --build-and-test and CDash submission

> > > > So my question is how to achieve CDash submission with 'scratch' > configure > > info (just as if cmake was invoked on clean environment), build info > > > (compilation warnings and such) and test results by issueing single > command ? > > > > Thanks for help, > > > > Wojtek > > Hi Wo

[CMake] Problem using Lahey Fortran Compiler

Hello everybody, I would like to build a Fortran static library using the Lahey Fortran Compiler. When building my project with the following command: cmake -G "NMake Makefiles" -D CMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER=lf95 .. --debug-trycompile the build crash with the following starting line: -- The F

Re: [CMake] Did anyone manage to get incremental linking working with NMake generator?

On 12/9/2010 5:26 AM, Gabriel Petrovay wrote: Thanks Bill for the trick. Unfortunately this works only for exe targets. It doesn't work for dll's. Moreover, before the link command there is this output: "Visual Studio Non-Incremental Link" If it says that then the /INCREMENTAL flag is not being

[CMake] Get diagnostics when FIND_XXX fails

Hi all, Is there a way to get useful diagnostics when, e.g., FIND_PATH() fails. I would like to be able to get a message like: Failed to find myheader.h, while searching the following directories: /foo /bar /baz. Now, I often find myself browsing a FindXXX.cmake file when it fails to find some

Re: [CMake] Simultaneous --build-and-test and CDash submission

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Wojciech Migda wrote: > Hi, > > I have unit tests configured for CDash submissions. Submissions do work if I > issue in sequence TWO commands which go pretty much like this: > > # configure the build system > ${CMAKE_ROOT}${CMAKE_BINDIR}/cmake . > # build tests > m

Re: [CMake] Platform differences for ExternalProject_add URL

On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 5:17 PM, KC Jones wrote: > [resending since the original seems to have never made it to the list.] > > I'm using ExternalProject_add in a script that builds various libraries I > depend on, and I'm running into platform differences when attempting to > download a source ar

Re: [CMake] Did anyone manage to get incremental linking working with NMake generator?

Thanks Bill for the trick. Unfortunately this works only for exe targets. It doesn't work for dll's. Moreover, before the link command there is this output: "Visual Studio Non-Incremental Link" Below you have the verbose build output (regardless if it's the first, 2nd, etc). Maybe this helps. Li

Re: [CMake] Simultaneous --build-and-test and CDash submission

>>> On 9-12-2010 at 10:13, in message , Wojciech Migda wrote: > Hi, > > I have unit tests configured for CDash submissions. Submissions do work if I > issue in sequence TWO commands which go pretty much like this: > > # configure the build system > ${CMAKE_ROOT}${CMAKE_BINDIR}/cmake . > # buil

[CMake] Simultaneous --build-and-test and CDash submission

Hi, I have unit tests configured for CDash submissions. Submissions do work if I issue in sequence TWO commands which go pretty much like this: # configure the build system ${CMAKE_ROOT}${CMAKE_BINDIR}/cmake . # build tests make clean ; make # run tests ${CMAKE_ROOT}${CMAKE_BINDIR}/ctest Howeve