Is there a blog or other web site that would walk me through setting up a
"Build Bot" on Windows for automated building/testing and submission to CDash?
Thanks
Mike Jackson
On Sep 5, 2014, at 2:40 PM, Bill Hoffman wrote:
> On 9/5/2014 11:49 AM, Chuck Atkins wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately on Windo
Indeed!
On 05/09/2014 20:09, David Cole via CMake wrote:
Wow.
--
Powered by www.kitware.com
Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at:
http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ
Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more
information on each offering,
I want to use different library folders for x64/x86/arm architectures.
Cmake has different generators for each arch: "Visual Studio 12
2013", "Visual Studio 12 2013 ARM", "Visual Studio 12 2013 Win64". Is there
any cmake var to get visual studio target arch? CMAKE_SYSTEM_PROCESSOR is
always AMD64 f
David
OK, understood.
Currently, the buildbot is running 145 unit tests, then 52 regression
tests in separate steps, every dashboard line has +145 and -52
respectively so the +/- numbers can’t get much worse!
My dashboard is 1.8.2 which dates back a few years. Just seeing the
red/green (and one
You're welcome.
One caveat to mention with this sort of submit pattern (submitting
multiple build or test chunks to a single row on the CDash dashboard)
is that it messes up the incremental +n/-n
compare-to-previous-submission numbers of build warnings and errors,
and number of test passes an
And without defining variables to get the functions stored into, how do you
propose to actually use the functions loaded?
Standard headers will provide prototypes, but those will be useless.
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 12:58 AM, Hendrik Sattler
wrote:
>
>
> On 6. September 2014 05:49:44 MESZ, J Dec
On 6. September 2014 05:49:44 MESZ, J Decker wrote:
>you'll need separate includes for dlopen thing, because you'll need the
>functions declares are pointers...
Not really
>void (*f)( void );
>or typedefed as functions
>typedef void (*some_function_type)( void );
>some_function_type f;
Usuall
David
Of course. So simple, I just tried it and it works, that will save me a
lot of script tweaking.
Thanks very much
JB
On 06/09/14 03:18, "David Cole" wrote:
>Not off topic at all.
>
>Try start, test, submit, test, submit. Should work.
>
>Start is the thing that writes a new time stamp t
