ssible
experience.
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: Bill Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:48 PM
To: Kevin Tucker
Subject: Re: [CMake] Removing cmake as a dependancy
Kevin Tucker wrote:
> Thanks Philip,
>
>
>
> I hadn't noticed the absolu
Kevin Tucker wrote:
Thanks Philip,
I hadn’t noticed the absolute paths yet. I can see that they would make
portability without cmake a problem.
Is there any problem with including the cmake installer inside other
products?
No problem at all. Really because of the amount of syste
EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Philip Lowman
Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:07 PM
To: Kevin Tucker
Cc: cmake@cmake.org
Subject: Re: [CMake] Removing cmake as a dependancy
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:54 PM, Kevin Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I have some example programs that
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:54 PM, Kevin Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have some example programs that are shipped with our sdk and would like
> to maintain support for VC6 and various VS200x project files. Cmake
> obviously does a great job of generating these project files. However, as
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:54 PM, Kevin Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Is there an option in cmake for it to leave itself out of the
> projects/makefiles that it generates?
There is, but I don't know how much tire kicking it gets, nor have I
ever used it. Someone who knows better can answe
I have some example programs that are shipped with our sdk and would
like to maintain support for VC6 and various VS200x project files.
Cmake obviously does a great job of generating these project files.
However, as an additional simplification for the end user, I would like
to avoid them having to
