On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Alex Merry wrote:
> On Saturday 27 December 2014 12:24:25 Harald Sitter wrote:
>> I think(tm) the way to fix this properly (which I have not ever seen
>> done by us :P) is fiddling with the find_package related variables
>> (supposedly PACKAGE_VERSION_COMPATIBLE wo
On Saturday 27 December 2014 12:24:25 Harald Sitter wrote:
> I think(tm) the way to fix this properly (which I have not ever seen
> done by us :P) is fiddling with the find_package related variables
> (supposedly PACKAGE_VERSION_COMPATIBLE would be used) to indicate that
> a given candidate package
On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 11:47 AM, David Edmundson
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Harald Sitter wrote:
>>
>> alohas.
>>
>> recently the QCA maintainer and I got into a discussion [1] whether a
>> qca-qt5 library should be a different config inside the same cmake
>> package or an in
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Harald Sitter wrote:
> alohas.
>
> recently the QCA maintainer and I got into a discussion [1] whether a
> qca-qt5 library should be a different config inside the same cmake
> package or an independent one (detailed discussion in the longest
> comment thread of t
On 17/12/14 22:47, Harald Sitter wrote:
> alohas.
>
> recently the QCA maintainer and I got into a discussion [1] whether a
> qca-qt5 library should be a different config inside the same cmake
> package or an independent one (detailed discussion in the longest
> comment thread of the review).
>
>
alohas.
recently the QCA maintainer and I got into a discussion [1] whether a
qca-qt5 library should be a different config inside the same cmake
package or an independent one (detailed discussion in the longest
comment thread of the review).
> find_package(Qca NAMES Qca-qt5 Qca-QT5 Qca-5 Qca REQU
