Hello,
I'm using cmake 3.4.1. I'm trying to compile libraries & executables with
an RPATH. To that end, I use the following settings:
SET(CMAKE_SKIP_BUILD_RPATH FALSE)
SET(CMAKE_BUILD_WITH_INSTALL_RPATH TRUE)
SET(CMAKE_INSTALL_RPATH_USE_LINK_PATH TRUE)
I then link in a lot of libraries. Ho
I am using an external project to download and build a third-party library
from GitHub. This works fine, except that every time, I run make, the
configure and build parts of the external project run, even though nothing
has changed. Here is the relevant CMake code:
Since I figured out how to get the separable cross-compile to a library working
I thought I would share.
To answer the “How can I use X to do Y” question
(http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#idp42280576):
The FindCUDA package defines the CUDA_LIBRARIES list, which includes the
pr
On 01/08/2016 02:50 PM, Yves Frederix wrote:
You are explicitly mentioning 'setting' of a property. IMHO there is a
big difference between setting and getting a property. If
white/blacklisting is enforced during setting only, wouldn't this be
sufficient? This would make it possible to simply ac
> Still at the very least this might be an argument to whitelist SOURCE_DIR.
>
> An argument for the whitelist diagnostics might be that it reduces reports
> from users which try to set build properties that do not have any effect in
> context of interface targets.
You are explicitly mentioning '
On 01/08/2016 01:07 PM, Yves Frederix wrote:
It might help the discussion if you could elaborate what use cases you have
in mind for non-whitelisted properties.
I deliberately did not mention my particular use case from the start
simply because I am interested in the reasoning behind the limitat
> It might help the discussion if you could elaborate what use cases you have
> in mind for non-whitelisted properties.
I deliberately did not mention my particular use case from the start
simply because I am interested in the reasoning behind the limitation,
not directly in how I can work around
On 01/08/2016 11:22 AM, Yves Frederix wrote:
Hi all,
Motivated by my own struggles with targets of type INTERFACE and a
recent post on this list, I was wondering what is the rationale behind
allowing only a whitelisted set of properties on targets of this type.
I understand that one of the use c
Hi all,
Motivated by my own struggles with targets of type INTERFACE and a
recent post on this list, I was wondering what is the rationale behind
allowing only a whitelisted set of properties on targets of this type.
I understand that one of the use cases for INTERFACE libraries is to
have a way t
