Re: [Boost-cmake] How to have Boost.MPI use OpenMPI (rather than MPICH2)

Denis Arnaud writes: > Hello! > > When building Boost (with CMake), the Boost.MPI library is built with a > dependency on the MPICH2 library, rather than OpenMPI. How can we change that > behaviour in the CMake configuration? > alt.boost.cmake uses cmake's standard detection of MPI... our docs a

Re: [Boost-cmake] dart as trac plugin

David Abrahams wrote: > on Tue May 27 2008, "troy d. straszheim" wrote: > >> David Abrahams wrote: >>>> - the model is simple. You ingest ctest's xml into the database, then >>>>any view of the data that you want to hack together, you can

Re: [Boost-cmake] dart as trac plugin

David Abrahams wrote: > on Thu May 29 2008, "troy d. straszheim" wrote: > >> David Abrahams wrote: >>> on Tue May 27 2008, "troy d. straszheim" wrote: >>> >>>> David Abrahams wrote: >>>>>> - the model is simple. Yo

[Boost-cmake] CTest and logfile scraping

All, Apologies if this mail rambles a bit. It discusses the architecture of ctest, how this impacts us, and a (potential) way to integrate our testing/reporting directly with cmake that removes many of these problems. Doug at some point said that we should stick with ctest because of the good i

Re: [Boost-cmake] CTest and logfile scraping

Hey Beman, Beman Dawes wrote: > > I've been much happier with the current Boost regression reporting since it > started reporting the SVN revision number. I'd hate to go back to a system > that didn't report that. > No question about it, this kind of meta-information is crucial. The snowblower

Re: [Boost-cmake] CTest and logfile scraping

> > This implies >> > peppering the build dependency tree with intermediate targets >> > that collect results and post them. > CMake has most of the facilities we need to move testing of Boost into > the build, which is one of the steps in this process. The > Boost-s

[Boost-cmake] Testing without CTest, XML without logscraping

.o *** *** Executing op:cxx_compile_object *** ['/usr/bin/c++', '-DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1', '-I/home/troy/Projects/boost/branches/CMake/release', '-O3', '-DNDEBUG', '-o', 'CMakeFiles/CRC-crc_test.dir/__/crc_test.cpp.o', '-c', '/

Re: [Boost-cmake] dart as trac plugin

David Abrahams wrote: [snip] > > Yes, that's what bjam is doing today. It uses popen to invoke all the > commands and capture their output. To do the same with CMake you may > need to request/implement some patches (?) > Turns it out wasn't necessary. :) >>> Maybe we should pursue both track

Re: [Boost-cmake] Testing without CTest, XML without logscraping

Doug Gregor wrote: > > Shouldn't that also have a DEPENDS ${BOOST_TEST_SOURCES} argument? > Good catch, thanks, and I'm finding some other loose ends, nothing major. My eyes are starting to cross, a fresh pair *will* be appreciated when they're available. >> The stdout/stderr/returnstatus, etc

[Boost-cmake] 'traash' demo

All, I have something up that people can try. It works like this: - Check out the CMake/release branch - run cmake to configure, then run ccmake and enable BOOST_BUILD_SLAVE and BOOST_TESTING. now go have a look at http://boost.resophonic.com/trac/traash roll over the 'go' link for the

Re: [Boost-cmake] Testing without CTest, XML without logscraping

t to flip the exit >> status of test subprocesses. They need checking on windows, see >> below. > > Troy, if you want access to a virtual Windows machine for testing some > of this stuff, just give me the word. I'd sorta prefer to stay ignorant, t

Re: [Boost-cmake] Testing without CTest, XML without logscraping

David Abrahams wrote: > on Fri Jun 06 2008, "troy d. straszheim" > wrote: >> I'd sorta prefer to stay ignorant, though if nobody else digs in I may >> end up taking you up on this, or imposing on some of my local windows-savvy >> colleagues. > > For

[Boost-cmake] popups on windows

I've made some progress here, have managed to get vista and XP posting build results to http://boost.resophonic.com/trac/traash. It isn't stable yet but should be soon. One problem I'm having are these nasty popups on e.g. run-fail tests, where the test program is supposed to dump core or what

Re: [Boost-cmake] Testing?

Beman Dawes wrote: Hi Troy, Are you at the point yet where it would be helpful to have some test slaves? Nearly. One thing I need to work out is supressing popups, see the previous mail. One just now came up on the screen of this borrowed vista laptop: class_properties_test.exe has

Re: [Boost-cmake] popups on windows

Doug Gregor wrote: On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 10:48 AM, troy d. straszheim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've made some progress here, have managed to get vista and XP posting build results to http://boost.resophonic.com/trac/traash. It isn't stable yet but should be soon. One pr

Re: [Boost-cmake] Test feedback

Beman Dawes wrote: Troy, Here is some initial feedback" Hey Beman, All good feedback. I neglected to mention that the documents assume that the reader is familiar with building/configuring via cmake. They've been updated, but could still use some work... and we now have a wiki

Re: [Boost-cmake] Test feedback

Beman Dawes wrote: I'm still hung at the step that says " Enable BOOST_BUILD_SLAVE and BOOST_BUILD_TESTING." There are no such entries to enable. > Does this help? http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/CMakeWindowsRegressionQuickstart it's BUILD_TESTING, not BOOST_BUILD_TESTING, my fault.

Re: [Boost-cmake] Test feedback

KSpam wrote: I can see how these CMake specifics can be very confusing to someone that is not used to CMake. It seems like it would be easier to have a testing configuration file that specifies the necessary configuration options. For example, we could have "BoostTestingSlave.cmake" with the

Re: [Boost-cmake] Test feedback

Justins's suggestion: It seems like it would be easier to have a testing configuration file that specifies the necessary configuration options. For example, we could have "BoostTestingSlave.cmake" was a good one, you can hide details and reduce the number of steps and avoid editing the cach

Re: [Boost-cmake] popups on windows

Evan Wheeler wrote: Okay, so if you call this windows API function: SetErrorMode( SEM_NOGPFAULTERRORBOX ); Evan sent a way to do this in python to me offline, it appears to work, checked in, problem solved for now. -t ___ Boost-cmake mailing list

[Boost-cmake] boost-cmake M.O.

Repost of a snippet of Doug Gregor's original announcement of this list and call for volunteers: A small group of volunteers has been working on a new build system for Boost based on CMake, a cross-platform, open-source build system. We have reached the point where our core build system has

Re: [Boost-cmake] Test feedback

Beman Dawes wrote: I didn't have a clue as to what BOOST_BUILD_SLAVE_HOSTNAME should be, so just left it blank. That resulted in the "Traash Demo" Hostname being set to bgd.myhome.westell.com , which I doubt is meaningful. meaningful enough What

Re: [Boost-cmake] Some issues getting started on Win32

On the CMAKE_RC_COMPILER: we saw this error as well... then it mysteriously disappeared, we didn't manage to toggle it and document how. It looks like there are some variations in the way visual studio gets installed that are relevant: http://www.cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=5719 [note that t

Re: [Boost-cmake] popups on windows

pitch in and have a look. My time is tightening up, July and first half of August are going to be really crazy months. -t troy d. straszheim wrote: Evan Wheeler wrote: Okay, so if you call this windows API function: SetErrorMode( SEM_NOGPFAULTERRORBOX ); Evan sent a way to do this in pyth

Re: [Boost-cmake] Test feedback

Beman Dawes wrote: I went back and set BOOST_BUILD_SLAVE_HOSTNAME to vista.dc.resophonic.com< http://vista.dc.resophonic.com/>, then tried nmake /I test. It runs for a bit and then pauses for a long time, then runs a bit more, etc. At this rate it will take days to run the full set of tests. Is t

Re: [Boost-cmake] Some issues getting started on Win32

troy d. straszheim wrote: On the CMAKE_RC_COMPILER: we saw this error as well... then it mysteriously disappeared, we didn't manage to toggle it and document how. I looked at this again, here are a couple of observations: Visual studio includes a .bat file that appears to load t

[Boost-cmake] 1.36.0 time. svnmerge clues?

All -- Looks to me like it is time to start tracking this upcoming 1.36.0 release in an effort to have the cmakeable version out at the same instant as the bjammable version. I'm willing to put in some time tweaking and testing... I'm guessing there's a standard way to do this via svnmerge, b

Re: [Boost-cmake] error when building assign/test/multi_index_container

Alex Ott wrote: Hello CMake tries to build libs/assign/test/multi_index_container but cannot find boost/archive/archive_exception.hpp & boost/serialization/access.hpp fixed: http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/46685/branches/CMake/release thanks for the report, -t ___

Re: [Boost-cmake] Cmake & Boost Libraries

Personally I find the embedding of toolset and version in library names to be problematic... in this case it makes the FindBoost.cmake really complicated and binds the (what should be simple) business of using the libraries to details that are utterly irrelevant here. I'd prefer to build boost

Re: [Boost-cmake] Some issues getting started on Win32

David Abrahams wrote: troy d straszheim wrote: Things look good. So... Dave is it possible you were doing configuration of cmake in a build directory that had failed configuration once? Gosh, I don't know. Maybe. Probably. Heck, shouldn't that work, after all!? How will

Re: [Boost-cmake] Cmake & Boost Libraries

Doug Gregor wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 11:39 PM, David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Doug Gregor wrote: I suggest that the vast majority of users should be using the multi-threaded versions; those that truly will only use Boost in single-threaded environments and are copying shared_pt

Re: [Boost-cmake] Some issues getting started on Win32

David Abrahams wrote: Beman Dawes wrote: I thought cmake was supposed to be robust. This is very discouraging; it implies cmake developers are only targeting folks who are cmake experts. Is it possible to disable this misfeature? I think Troy is saying that we get to control what gets

Re: [Boost-cmake] Cmake & Boost Libraries

Beman Dawes wrote: Doug, you need to explain this to us Windows developers who don't have a clue as to how to manage multiple build variants of libraries without name mangling. I don't think it is absolutely necessary to do so. Again, CMake can mangle, or not. FWIW, I'm working on a co

Re: [Boost-cmake] Test feedback

Beman Dawes wrote: On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 8:25 AM, troy d. straszheim <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: I've seen this but haven't had time to dig in and solve it yet. CPU usage drops to zero and the thing just sits there Yes, those are t

Re: [Boost-cmake] Cmake & Boost Libraries

Ah. Actually what you want to do here is use gcc -dumpversion: % gcc-3.4 --version gcc-3.4 (GCC) 3.4.6 (Ubuntu 3.4.6-6ubuntu2) Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FI

Re: [Boost-cmake] Test feedback

David Abrahams wrote: troy d. straszheim wrote: The test that causes this is just a program with a main() routine... It seems like it should use boost.test, and boost.test should be responsible for making these dialog-suppressing calls. (Does that sound like it makes sense?) 1. I'm relu

Re: [Boost-cmake] BUILD_VERSIONED not working correctly?

Hey Miguel, Miguel A. Figueroa-Villanueva wrote: Hello, I'm using the boost cmake build with BUILD_VERSIONED turned off. However, I still get all these libs: boost_date_time-mt-gd.dll boost_date_time-mt-gd.lib boost_date_time-mt.dll boost_date_time-mt.lib libboost_date_time-mt-gd.lib libboost_

Re: [Boost-cmake] Problem with Boost-CMake Install Rule

Miguel A. Figueroa-Villanueva wrote: Hello, The following snippet from the Boost-CMake build CMakeLists.txt file is not working for me. Particularly, the REGEX ".svn" is causing the rule to create the ${BOOST_HEADER_DIR}, but doesn't copy all the files and subdirectories. It doesn't report any e

Re: [Boost-cmake] Problem with Boost-CMake Install Rule

Miguel A. Figueroa-Villanueva wrote: PATTERN ".svn" EXCLUDE should work here as well, no? -t Yes, that works too. Tried it here just to make sure and it worked as expected. --Miguel Fixed on the release branch. Thanks! -t ___ Boost-cmake mail

[Boost-cmake] auto-modularization. Time to merge to main release branch?

Saw some discussion on this... here's the story. I'll skip discussion of why one would want to do this at all :) I believe this clears the way to check the cmake stuff in to the main release branch alongside everything else: everything can happily coexist with Boost.Build. We no longer nee

[Boost-cmake] What we're doing testing-wise (was Status and future of boost-cmake)

Miguel A. Figueroa-Villanueva wrote: - Is there a CDash dashboard actively running? It seems that the http://dart.resophonic.com/boost_1_34_0/Dashboard has been down for the last 4 days at least... Troy's been working on an updated system that isn't based on CDash. I haven't been keeping up with

Re: [Boost-cmake] auto-modularization. Time to merge to main release branch?

Doug Gregor wrote: On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What is the status of using CMake to run regression tests? What is the status of using CMake to run developers local tests? Troy's the master here :) On the client side, regression testing works well,

Re: [Boost-cmake] Problem with Boost-CMake Install Rule

Whoops, I only got a couple of them: http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/46937/branches/CMake/release Committed the other two in r47108.Thanks again! -t Miguel A. Figueroa-Villanueva wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 12:33 AM, troy d. straszheim wrote: Miguel A. Figueroa-Villanueva

Re: [Boost-cmake] auto-modularization. Time to merge to main release branch?

Beman Dawes wrote: I woke up thinking about this same point. It is just plain too late to make this sort of change to branches/release. We are about to close the release to everything except emergency bug fixes, and this clearly doesn't qualify as that. In thinking more about the effect on m

[Boost-cmake] new regression testing interface

I did some work on this: http://boost.resophonic.com/trac/traash Switched sqlite => mysql, added a few indexes, changed around the views so as not to render an entire 6k step build/test run at once. Seems a bit snappier. Comments welcome. -t

Re: [Boost-cmake] new regression testing interface

David Abrahams wrote: on Fri Jul 04 2008, "Doug Gregor" wrote: On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 2:02 PM, troy d. straszheim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I did some work on this: http://boost.resophonic.com/trac/traash Switched sqlite => mysql, added a few indexes, changed around

Re: [Boost-cmake] BUILD_BOOST_* and TEST_BOOST_* options

Doug Gregor wrote: Instead, I suggest that we have advanced cache variables BOOST_INCLUDE_ONLY and BOOST_EXCLUDE_ONLY. Users can set only one of these, and they have the following behavior: Yeah. Thumbs up. -t ___ Boost-cmake mailing list Boost-c

Re: [Boost-cmake] Access to test reporting database?

Beman Dawes wrote: Are the results of the CMake based regression testing stored in a database I can access? Here's a dump, 865k rows: http://boost.resophonic.com/mysql.trac.gz The tables you are interested in are traash_build and traash_step, the rest are used by trac itself for bookkeeping

Re: [Boost-cmake] Graphical binary installers for 1.36.0?

Doug Gregor wrote: (3) Fix any remaining issues with the CMake build - Make sure every Boost library has its tests running in CMake - Get the remaining Boost tools building with CMake (e.g., bcp) - Figure out how we want to deal with documentation builds/installs in CMake -

Re: [Boost-cmake] boost cmake status

Matthias Schabel wrote: After experiencing non-stop frustration with building boost 1.36 on OS X with bjam/boost.build, I was excited to discover that there has been significant work on porting to CMake. A couple of questions: 1) where are the most current CMake build files located? $SVN/bra

Re: [Boost-cmake] boost cmake status

Mike Jackson wrote: Also, do you need a tester for OS X? I am running 10.4.11 Intel and would be happy to try and setup some sort of script to download and test regularly. Hey Mike, I'll take you up on that, I'd definitely like some testers. I'm many time zones from home right now but w

Re: [Boost-cmake] boost cmake on OSX

Matthias Schabel wrote: I would love to help make this happen - the current bjam/Boost.Build system for OSX seems to be getting crappier and harder to make work rather than better and easier. Obviously, the natural way to distribute Boost on OSX is as a single Universal Framework. I'm no expe

Re: [Boost-cmake] Variant Builds and missing libraries

Michael Jackson wrote: Is Python installed by default on Windows?advocate> There is already plenty of python there. Have you noticed it? I think it is a little late to have this debate. Python is the right tool for the job. -t ___ Boost-cmake

Re: [Boost-cmake] Regression Test Reporting

. I will keep you posted. If you had some specifics, it might be helpful to guide us as we add new features to CDash. So, if either you and/or Troy could send me a summary of features that you would like to see, it would be helpful. I remember some of your requests from when we talked in

Re: [Boost-cmake] Regression Test Reporting

troy d. straszheim wrote: One thing that has changed since that discussion is tests-as-first-class-targets: for boost, at least, the extra cost in generation time and time-to-build is prohibitive, and the regex-selection style of ctest (-R mylibrary) is more straightforward and functional

Re: [Boost-cmake] Boost CMake status?

Hey Joaquin, JOAQUIN M. LOPEZ MUÑOZ wrote: Hi, I've discovered that the libs at the trunk are populated by files by the name CMakeLists.txt and module.cmake and I assume these belong to the once annonced effort to create a build infrastructure for Boost with CMake. I'd have several questions in

Re: [Boost-cmake] Boost CMake at BoostCon?

Beman Dawes wrote: On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:27 PM, David Abrahams wrote: on Fri Jan 09 2009, "Beman Dawes" wrote: Is anyone planning to submit a BoostCon proposal for a talk, tutorial, or workshop on Boost CMake? Seems like this would be a natural to build momentum. I've been considering

Re: [Boost-cmake] Analysis of the current CMake system

Hi Brad, There is a lot to discuss here. I'll go back later and make specific comments. It'd be great to talk in person at boostcon, (boostcon rocks, by the way.) I understand/agree with a lot of your points (especially bulkiness, and the need to reduce the number of toplevel targets), in m

Re: [Boost-cmake] Analysis of the current CMake system

David Abrahams wrote: on Wed Jan 14 2009, "troy d. straszheim" wrote: Hi Brad, There is a lot to discuss here. I'll go back later and make specific comments. It'd be great to talk in person at boostcon, (boostcon rocks, by the way.) I understand/agree with a lot of you

Re: [Boost-cmake] Analysis of the current CMake system

Brad King wrote: The boost-cmake-for-users talk could of course reflect whatever we get done between now and then. Has anyone submitted anything for this yet? We (Kitware) can present our CMake/CTest/CDash/CPack software process in general, but the boost-specific part should probably be done

Re: [Boost-cmake] Analysis of the current CMake system

Brad King wrote: David Abrahams wrote: * logfile scraping is too hopelessly fragile to make for a good testing system, and there are better and possibly even easier alternatives. The question here is whether one wants to test with the same tools users might use to build the project. If one

Re: [Boost-cmake] Analysis of the current CMake system

Brad King wrote: troy d. straszheim wrote: I don't quite get "That doesn't mean we can't test some tools without log-scraping". I see two different cases here. There's the developer working under visual studio or emacs who wants to run some tests. This guy know

[Boost-cmake] cmake not on release branch

I'm wondering what the story is with this... is it OK to merge the cmakelists and whatnot over there, so that releases end up being cmake-buildable? I'm guessing whoever is building binary installers w/ cmake has to jump through some hoops to get that done. -t

[Boost-cmake] cmake on release branch

Beman Dawes wrote: On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 11:45 AM, troy d. straszheim wrote: I'm wondering what the story is with this... is it OK to merge the cmakelists and whatnot over there, so that releases end up being cmake-buildable? Yes, please do. Done. I haven't gone through

Re: [Boost-cmake] README.txt and Welcome.txt?

I tweaked things when I brought cmake over so that it wouldn't insist on having a README.txt there, but of course it'd be good to have something better than the generic one that comes packaged with cmake. Could we get a line added to the "official" docs and changelog that experimental CMake su

Re: [Boost-cmake] README.txt and Welcome.txt?

Daniel James wrote: I've added a note to the changelog and the groups page on the beta site. If there are any other pages you'd like me to change, let me know. http://beta.boost.org/community/groups.html#cmake http://beta.boost.org/users/news/version_1_38_0#version_1_38_0.other_changes Perfe

Re: [Boost-cmake] [boost] RE Boost 1.38.0 beta 2 available

(pulled over from main boost list) Beman Dawes wrote: Yes. There will be a lot more discussion and review before V3 ships. I keep hoping someone will volunteer to fix Cygwin, too. Things looking fine for an experimental release, but is it OK to commit cosmetic fixes, small tweaks to the CMa

Re: [Boost-cmake] Using QuickBook without Boost.Build

Thomas Klimpel wrote: Hi, The QuickBook toolchain is a bit tricky to set up properly. According to https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/BoostDocs/GettingStarted the chain to generate .html from a .qbk file is QuickBook -> BoostBook -> DocBook -> HTML According to the documentation of QuickBoo

Re: [Boost-cmake] Analysis of the current CMake system

Ingo Albrecht wrote: Note that vcbuild (the command line driver for VS builds) has command line arguments for specifying strings to prefix log messages at various log levels with. This should make log scraping of the compilation much more reliable, although it still disgusts me. This does not wor

[Boost-cmake] Boost 1.38.0 released (installer time?)

One reason for my request to merge to the release branch was so that these fancy binary installers could get built from the release itself and not from some hacked-up branch. So those of you who like these things are free to experiment with cmake's 'make package'. You need to 'make modulari

Re: [Boost-cmake] Build failures on Mac OS X 10.5

Hey, E. Wing wrote: > > /Developer/usr/bin/libtool: unknown option character `W' in: -Wl,-u,_munmap I'll look in to this one. Workarounds: if you don't need the static libs you can just turn BUILD_STATIC off. Alternately, if you don't need boost::mpi, you can turn BUILD_MPI off. CMake

Re: [Boost-cmake] Headers erased after the first building in VC8 of boost 1.38

Trimoldi, F. (Filippo) wrote: I generated a Boost.sln solution for VC8 with the new system CMake. ( using this command: cmake -DCMAKE_IS_EXPERIMENTAL=YES_I_KNOW CMakeLists.txt in root directory of the boost ) When I try to build the entire solution all thinks goes good without problem. But

Re: [Boost-cmake] Build failures on Mac OS X 10.5

E. Wing wrote: Does anybody know how to get/build universal binaries for ICU so I can get the Boost build to work as universal? No... but do let us know if you get the details. Thanks, -t ___ Boost-cmake mailing list Boost-cmake@lists.boost.org http

Re: [Boost-cmake] Build failures on Mac OS X 10.5

Michael Jackson wrote: What build system is ICU using? You may have to add the -arch ppc -arch i386 flags yourself on the command line using something like CXXFLAGS="-arch ppc -arch i386" You can use bjam to get a universal build of Boost. If it is just a matter of adding some CXXFLAGS it sh

Re: [Boost-cmake] Build failures on Mac OS X 10.5

Michael Jackson wrote: Well, basically I am confused. Is ICU bundled with Boost? It has been a Long time since I dug into the boost sources. Any system-install ICU is just detected by cmake (see tools/build/CMake/FindICU.cmake), and boost builds against it, if it is there. And, yes, CMa

Re: [Boost-cmake] Analysis of the current CMake system

David Abrahams wrote: Trilinos is a very large project, so they label pieces of it in CMake, CTest propagates the labels with failure reports, and CDash interprets the labels to break results down by subproject. The same thing could be used for Boost's library hierarchy. Awesome. Maybe I'

Re: [Boost-cmake] Headers erased after the first building in VC8 of boost 1.38

Trimoldi, F. (Filippo) wrote: Yes, in fact in the default configuration of my solution, both "INSTALL" and "modularize" projects aren't checked for their building, but a the end of my first building all my headers are erased... what I'm making a mistake in? I don't know. Unfortunately, I don'

Re: [Boost-cmake] trying to use non-system Python

Randy Heiland wrote: Hello, I'll post this in case someone knows the answer, while I go searching... I want to specify a non-system Python to be used, so I set the following in my CMakeCache.txt (obviously, I'm on OSX): PYTHON_DEBUG_LIBRARY:FILEPATH=/Python.framework PYTHON_EXECUTABLE:FILEPA

Re: [Boost-cmake] trying to use non-system Python

Randy Heiland wrote: Hmm. So setting those manually in your cmake cache triggers a reconf for boost-cmake, but not the other project you speak of? -t Correct. I think I asked the wrong question if you edit your CMakeCache.txt for any reason the makefiles will get regenerated. I jus

Re: [Boost-cmake] bug in Boost 1.39 (svn)

I just saw that. Fixed. Thanks. -t Kito Berg-Taylor wrote: In the current svn version of boost there appears to be a mistake in the root CMakeLists.txt file. There is an errant "c" on line 51. Patch included below. (Ironic location for a bug :-P) Index: CMakeLists.txt ===

[Boost-cmake] IRC: #boost-cmake on freenode

This IRC channel exists, just FYI. A couple of us are in there if anybody feels like dropping by. -t ___ Boost-cmake mailing list Boost-cmake@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-cmake

Re: [Boost-cmake] CDash dashboard now available

Doug Gregor wrote: This is a work in progress; we'll be working to make submission easier (e.g., via CTest scripts), get more testing working, and make use of some of the newer, cooler features of CDash that can help Boost... but we could certainly use more help! Anybody know offhand what the

[Boost-cmake] Wiki to disappear: docs in progress

I've been working hard on getting some proper docs together. Whats done is here: http://www.resophonic.com/boost_cmake/index.html Not quite everything is off the wiki just yet. Bug reports welcome, help is more welcome. If you're good with restructuredtext/sphinx/git, you can clone this

Re: [Boost-cmake] CDash dashboard now available

Doug Gregor wrote: IIRC, the "*\fast" targets rebuild something without rebuilding dependencies. Yeah. If you are e.g. hacking on an executable 'myprog' which links to libraries lib1..libn, 'make myprog/fast' will skip checking whether lib1..libn need rebuilding start from myprog's objec

Re: [Boost-cmake] Creating "Known Issues": CMake Problems with boost 1.39

Tan, Tom (Shanghai) wrote: This is a re-post from the boost-users list, Thanks to Troy d. straszheim who reminded me there that there’s a dedicated list here. Good to see you over here I used CMake to build boost 1.39 and found

Re: [Boost-cmake] Windows installer available for experimentation

Beman Dawes wrote: For me the next step will be to read the CMake docs a bit, look through the CMake files in the Boost tree, and generally become more familiar with CMake as it applies to Boost. Hey, This might be easiest: if you have edits, click "show source" on the right hand side of t

[Boost-cmake] Patched 1.39

There's a git branch of patches to the 1.39 release of cmake here: http://sodium.resophonic.com/git/boost_patches/?h=cmake-patches/Boost_1_39_0 If we're going to do a patch release of 1.39 for the boost.build tweaks, I'd like to get these in as well. Tarballs of this patchset from this git re

Re: [Boost-cmake] Wiki to disappear: docs in progress

David Wolfe wrote: This is my first attempt to use git, so I have no idea what this means. Did that branch disappear or something? Sorry about that. Docs fixed. -t ___ Boost-cmake mailing list Boost-cmake@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/ma

Re: [Boost-cmake] CDash dashboard now available

g/svn/boost/trunk boost-trunk For this package-building exercise all the relevant stuff is at http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/branches/release since the release branch is open, my git is synced up with svn. to get the code? Troy mentioned a 'patch branch', so I'm wondering i

[Boost-cmake] Tool: tracking jamfile changes

I was playing around with git and put together a script to help us keep up with what is happening in bjamland. It is run every 10 minutes by a cronjob. The output is here: http://sodium.resophonic.com/cmakefiles-release-inspect.txt At the top are "out of date" files, that is, where a CMakeLi

Re: [Boost-cmake] Tool: tracking jamfile changes

Doug Gregor wrote: On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:59 AM, troy d. straszheim wrote: I was playing around with git and put together a script to help us keep up with what is happening in bjamland. It is run every 10 minutes by a cronjob. The output is here: http://sodium.resophonic.com/cmakefiles

Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

Doug Gregor wrote: Note that, for these labels to work, the tester needs to be running CMake 2.7.x (which is currently in CMake CVS but isn't yet an official release). This is pretty important, because labels are also going to be used to give the library-centric view of the dashboard. Nifty..

Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

Brad King wrote: troy d. straszheim wrote: Doug Gregor wrote: Note that, for these labels to work, the tester needs to be running CMake 2.7.x (which is currently in CMake CVS but isn't yet an official release). This is pretty important, because labels are also going to be used to giv

Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

Brad King wrote: The script can be written totally outside the source and build trees. If written properly it can do the initial checkout and create the build tree. A standalone script I use to do one of CMake's builds appears below. You can also create project-specific helper scripts like this

Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

Michael Jackson wrote: [ snip lots of code ] So I can have a cron task just run the first shell script and I can submit a dashboard with all the options that I want. Again, Not sure if that helps explain anything or not. Just posting as an example. Would you be willing to have a go at

[Boost-cmake] link tests

I was trying to fix asio link tests and hit a couple of snags. I put in a workaround (which I bet breaks more than it fixes) and would like some feedback from kitware. The problems i was trying to fix: 1. The test is to ensure that linking against another built library succeeds. Typically

Re: [Boost-cmake] Path to test binaries for Boost.MPI (and Boost.graph_parallel) seems to be incorrect

Nick Edmonds wrote: Hi All, I've been hacking the CMake build system to build the tests/examples for libs/graph_parallel and in doing so found that the path to the tests seems to be incorrect. are you on the release branch? The trunk is currently lagging. If you want to just check in w

Re: [Boost-cmake] Path to test binaries for Boost.MPI (and Boost.graph_parallel) seems to be incorrect

Beman Dawes wrote: On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 4:47 PM, troy d. straszheim wrote: Nick Edmonds wrote: Hi All, I've been hacking the CMake build system to build the tests/examples for libs/graph_parallel and in doing so found that the path to the tests seems to be incorrect. are you o

[Boost-cmake] target property LOCATION

This is documented as deprecated in cmake 2.6, but not so in 2.7.CVS. I think I need to get the absolute location of an executable so I can pass it to add_test. How should this be done? -t ___ Boost-cmake mailing list Boost-cmake@lists.boost.org

[Boost-cmake] merged to trunk (mpi tests fixed)

Hey, I went interrupt-driven for a bit and merged to trunk. Nick, I cleaned up the mpi tests while I was in there, they should make a more sensible example of how to do the graph_parallel stuff now. Unfortunately this is a difficult/complicated case... a lot of the internals of how testi

  1   2   >