Re: [CMake] setting/removing compiler flag (-g) for a single project directory

suppose the experts should chime in. Steven On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 4:07 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > On Friday September 15 2017 16:51:24 Steven Velez wrote: > > >Yeah... I didn't mean to respond personally... i didn't realize my client > >was doing that and not the li

[CMake] ZERO_CHECK generation and Xcode

If I understand correctly the purpose of the ZERO_CHECK target is to update the generated project files when necessary. That's fine, but I have noticed on Xcode (8.2) that when ZERO_CHECK runs and updates the project, it causes the xcode build to abort. Unfortunately, it seems this build abort hap

Re: [CMake] What is the purpose of cmake's -N parameter?

like to see the value of CMAKE_PROJECT_NAME. Any tips? Thanks, Steven On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Steven Velez wrote: > The docs say: > > View mode only. >> >> Only load the cache. Do not actually run configure and generate steps. >> > > But I wonder what you

[CMake] What is the purpose of cmake's -N parameter?

The docs say: View mode only. > > Only load the cache. Do not actually run configure and generate steps. > But I wonder what you can do with cmake after that to view the cache? The -L parameter seems to display the same set of variables with or without this set, and scripts run in process script

Re: [CMake] VERSION and SOVERSION target properties on OS X

Ah... good idea. I should have considered that. Thanks. On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Clinton Stimpson wrote: > On Friday, October 10, 2014 12:43:53 PM Steven Velez wrote: > > Forgive me if this question has been answered before but with CMAKE > 2.8.12 > > (I believe) xc

[CMake] VERSION and SOVERSION target properties on OS X

Forgive me if this question has been answered before but with CMAKE 2.8.12 (I believe) xcode builds on OS X started generating shared libraries decorated with the "VERSION" target property and symlinked by a bare dylib name and one decorated with the SOVERSION. I understand this is common practice

Re: [CMake] How the heck does one set options?

Just a guess, but the docs for option state: option( "help string describing option" [initial value]) Provide an option for the user to select as ON or OFF. If no initial value is provided, OFF is used. In this description is not optional, but the initial value is. In the usage pre

[CMake] Properties on Projects ( was: Enhancing the Visual Studio Generators' Source Control integration )

) are implicitly read-only. Would there be a reason to avoid my proposal? Thanks, Steven On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:34 AM, Steven Velez wrote: > Hi All, > > We have noticed, that using the VS_SCC_* target properties, we can > bind to a perforce SCM server.  However, the way that S

Re: [CMake] SCC bindings missing AUXPATH support?

obert Dailey wrote: > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Steven Velez wrote: >> >> Hi Robert, >> >> I reviewed the patch, and I am not sure vsAuxPath should be a >> requirement.  As I stated earlier, we've gotten the binding to work >> acceptably wit

Re: [CMake] SCC bindings missing AUXPATH support?

Hi Robert, I reviewed the patch, and I am not sure vsAuxPath should be a requirement. As I stated earlier, we've gotten the binding to work acceptably without it and I assume others have as well. Further, some users may prefer to enter their connection information in to the perforce dialog on fi

[CMake] Enhancing the Visual Studio Generators' Source Control integration

Hi All, We have noticed, that using the VS_SCC_* target properties, we can bind to a perforce SCM server. However, the way that SCC works the perforce plugin has to prompt the user for connection information. When we were doing this with hand-made visual studio solutions, we would only be prompte

Re: [CMake] Source control bindings feature in CMake needs better documentation

Hi Robert, I don't pretend to know everything there is to know about Visual Studio SCC integration, but I have gotten this to work before with a bit of trial and error, and reverse-engineering the entries visual studio creates for these properties. To answer your most recent question, there is no

[CMake] Announcement: Visual Studio extension for editing CMake files available.

Hello All, This is a one time message to publicize the availability of a project of my own creation that will add CMake language-specific features to visual studio. The project home page is hosted on google code: http://code.google.com/p/vissemee/ I have just made the first binary build availabl

Re: [CMake] Bug fix requests for the *next* release of CMake...

http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=12299 ___ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.or

Re: [CMake] Building a MS COM Dll with Cmake

Since no one has yet replied, I will comment that this workflow is much like what Qt does with the moc (meta-object-compiler) and uic tools. Looking at the FindQt4.cmake and the referenced Qt4Macros.cmake files, it seems like these could provide some examples to follow... ... though its true the

Re: [CMake] Please help with procedure for making contributions

David Cole wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Steven Velez wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> After having searched the cmake web site and wiki, I have been unable >> to find a documented procedure for submitting patches to CMake.   Via >> brwosing the bug tracker and

[CMake] Please help with procedure for making contributions

Hi All, After having searched the cmake web site and wiki, I have been unable to find a documented procedure for submitting patches to CMake. Via brwosing the bug tracker and watching this list, it seems generally apparent that a non-committer who wants to make a contribution simply opens an iss

Re: [CMake] Patch for watcom InstallRequiredSystemLibraries

I'd like to know the same. Particularly with respect to whether any documents will need to be signed, and for how much longer patches (that aren't bug fixes) will be accepted to 2.8.5. Thanks, Steven On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 1:53 AM, J Decker wrote: > so what is the proper way for someone without