On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 12:14 AM, JonY wrote:
> From what I gather, I'll need to:
>
> 1. Write an external tool/driver to do this.
> 2. Split into subprojects.
> 3. Have cmake call itself recursively.
Errr... no
1. Write a CMakeLists.txt for the compiled-to-host-platform projects
2. Write a CMak
On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 07:14:42 +0800
JonY wrote:
> On 11/12/2012 03:36, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Jon wrote:
> >
> >> So here's the question.
> >>
> >> Can the method I use when cross-compiling, namely, use cmake's
> >> `ExternalProject` module (causes cmake
On 11/12/2012 03:36, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Jon wrote:
>
>> So here's the question.
>>
>> Can the method I use when cross-compiling, namely, use cmake's
>> `ExternalProject` module (causes cmake to run itself and generate artifacts
>> in a different dir) to
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Jon wrote:
> So here's the question.
>
> Can the method I use when cross-compiling, namely, use cmake's
> `ExternalProject` module (causes cmake to run itself and generate artifacts
> in a different dir) to pre-build an environment on the build system that's
>
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 19:13:04 +0800
JonY wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 18:50, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 11:27 AM, JonY wrote:
> >
> >>> What were the "rigidities"? Maybe I can help
> >>
> >> We need to a way to inject .a libraries with additional objects compiled
> >> from
Op 11 nov. 2012 14:45 schreef "K. Frank" het
volgende:
>
> Hi Jim!
>
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Jim Michaels wrote:
> > comeau didn't compile it either.
>
> If Comeau didn't compile it (nor did gcc), in all probability it's
illegal code
> on your part. (I've never caught Comeau up in a m
Hi Jim!
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Jim Michaels wrote:
> comeau didn't compile it either.
If Comeau didn't compile it (nor did gcc), in all probability it's illegal code
on your part. (I've never caught Comeau up in a mistake, although I'm
sure the language lawyers out there could if they
On 11/11/2012 18:50, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 11:27 AM, JonY wrote:
>
>>> What were the "rigidities"? Maybe I can help
>>
>> We need to a way to inject .a libraries with additional objects compiled
>> from a different step,
>
> See add_library(OBJECT):
>
> http://www
2012/11/11 Kai Tietz
> 2012/11/11 niXman :
> > 2012/11/11 Kai Tietz:
> >> So any help for it is most welcome. The build-system is an important
> >> issue, but even more we need developers/reviewers of it and a lot of
> >> support :)
> >
> > I wish to take part in development/testing of this proj
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> The ironCrate project has as one goal that it shall be API-compatible
> to msvcr*.dll (means best providing same API as msvcr100.dll from
> user-perspective. For sure I won't be able - and don't intent to make
> it 100% feature compatible. Fo
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 11:27 AM, JonY wrote:
>> What were the "rigidities"? Maybe I can help
>
> We need to a way to inject .a libraries with additional objects compiled
> from a different step,
See add_library(OBJECT):
http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake/Tutorials/Object_Library
(in the past you
2012/11/11 niXman :
> 2012/11/11 Kai Tietz:
>> So any help for it is most welcome. The build-system is an important
>> issue, but even more we need developers/reviewers of it and a lot of
>> support :)
>
> I wish to take part in development/testing of this project.
> Where I can get the sources?
>
2012/11/11 Kai Tietz:
> So any help for it is most welcome. The build-system is an important
> issue, but even more we need developers/reviewers of it and a lot of
> support :)
I wish to take part in development/testing of this project.
Where I can get the sources?
--
Regards,
niXman
Hi Vaclav,
2012/11/11 Václav Šmilauer :
>
>> I have the crazy idea to help with ironCrate.
> Just for my knowledge (I am new to mingw), has ironCrate different goals
> than other non-MS implementations of MSVC runtime? I imagine reactos
> must have one, for instance.
So I am finally detected this
On 11/11/2012 18:02, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> Any decent build system needs that kind of constructs. Is the CMake
> syntax a bit different from autotools'? Sure. So what? With CMake you
> do exactly the same checks you did with autotools, only you may need
> to consider some Windows specifics w
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 10:05 AM, JonY wrote:
>>> Sounds like they are reinventing autotools.
>>
>> Lol, no.
>
> See the
> https://github.com/mruby/mruby/blob/master/cmake/modules/IntrospectSystem.cmake
> example.
How is this different from what you would to in configure.ac in autotools?
AC_CON
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 10:14 AM, JonY wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 16:42, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:26 AM, JonY wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds like they are reinventing autotools.
>>
>> As Ruben says, it's not the case.
>>
>> The main problem with autotools is they do not support W
On 11/11/2012 16:42, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:26 AM, JonY wrote:
>
>> Sounds like they are reinventing autotools.
>
> As Ruben says, it's not the case.
>
> The main problem with autotools is they do not support Windows. Even
> with CoApp, autotools support is far f
On 11/11/2012 16:34, Ruben Van Boxem wrote:
>>> I think he means "macro" and "module" files. Usually you distribute
>>>
>>
>> Sounds like they are reinventing autotools.
>
> Lol, no.
>
See the
https://github.com/mruby/mruby/blob/master/cmake/modules/IntrospectSystem.cmake
example.
>
> Wrong.
Op 11 nov. 2012 09:51 schreef "Jacek Caban" het
volgende:
>
> On 11/11/12 9:46 AM, Václav Šmilauer wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I got recently hit by compilation error due to dlgs.h (included from
> > windows.h) #defining several macros with common names - in my case rad1,
> > rad2 (for radius 1, rad
> I got recently hit by compilation error due to dlgs.h (included from
> windows.h) #defining several macros with common names - in my case rad1,
> rad2 (for radius 1, radius 2). Are those part of Windows API or could
> they be renamed to something less prone to conflict with user code, or
> perhap
On 11/11/12 9:46 AM, Václav Šmilauer wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I got recently hit by compilation error due to dlgs.h (included from
> windows.h) #defining several macros with common names - in my case rad1,
> rad2 (for radius 1, radius 2). Are those part of Windows API or could
> they be renamed to somet
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:26 AM, JonY wrote:
> Sounds like they are reinventing autotools.
As Ruben says, it's not the case.
The main problem with autotools is they do not support Windows. Even
with CoApp, autotools support is far from *acceptable* on Windows.
>> A "toolchain" file is just a f
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:43 AM, niXman wrote:
> If I only could, I on a global scale would forbid autotools use, and I
> would provide criminal punishment for violation of this prohibition =)
IMHO, autotools are perfectly fine if you are on a Unix-based
operating system. The moment Windows enter
Hello,
I got recently hit by compilation error due to dlgs.h (included from
windows.h) #defining several macros with common names - in my case rad1,
rad2 (for radius 1, radius 2). Are those part of Windows API or could
they be renamed to something less prone to conflict with user code, or
perh
If I only could, I on a global scale would forbid autotools use, and I
would provide criminal punishment for violation of this prohibition =)
--
Regards,
niXman
___
Dual-target(32 & 64-bit) MinGW compilers for 32 and 64-bit Windows:
http://sourcef
Op 11 nov. 2012 09:27 schreef "JonY" het
volgende:
>
> On 11/11/2012 15:59, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 2:39 AM, JonY
wrote:
> >
> >>> It's unfortunate you both had bad experiences with cmake. Cmake
really is quite powerful, and recent syntax mods make it friendlier to
On 11/11/2012 15:59, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 2:39 AM, JonY wrote:
>
>>> It's unfortunate you both had bad experiences with cmake. Cmake really is
>>> quite powerful, and recent syntax mods make it friendlier to use.
>>>
>>> For example, I contributed the following cm
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 2:39 AM, JonY wrote:
>> It's unfortunate you both had bad experiences with cmake. Cmake really is
>> quite powerful, and recent syntax mods make it friendlier to use.
>>
>> For example, I contributed the following cmake build scripts to the mruby
>> project
>>
>> https
29 matches
Mail list logo
