Am Donnerstag 22 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> Am Montag, den 19.07.2010, 07:08 +0200 schrieb Kornel Benko:
> > > Where can I find explanations of these new options? At least
> > > LYX_CPACK, LYX_INSTALL, and LYX_NLS are opaque to me.
> > >
> > > BH
> >
> > This is all in flux now. Some very
Am Montag, den 19.07.2010, 07:08 +0200 schrieb Kornel Benko:
> >
> > Where can I find explanations of these new options? At least
> > LYX_CPACK, LYX_INSTALL, and LYX_NLS are opaque to me.
> >
> > BH
>
> This is all in flux now. Some very short explanations can be seen with
> "make edit_cac
Am Montag 19 Juli 2010 schrieb BH:
> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Kornel Benko wrote:
> > Am Sonntag 18 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> >> Am Sonntag, den 18.07.2010, 22:33 +0200 schrieb Stephan Witt:
> >> > Am 18.07.2010 um 22:21 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> >> > > Seems I've lost the fight agai
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Kornel Benko wrote:
> Am Sonntag 18 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
>> Am Sonntag, den 18.07.2010, 22:33 +0200 schrieb Stephan Witt:
>> > Am 18.07.2010 um 22:21 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
>> > > Seems I've lost the fight against the default ON of LYX_INSTALL.
>> > >
>>
Am Sonntag 18 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> Am Sonntag, den 18.07.2010, 22:33 +0200 schrieb Stephan Witt:
> > Am 18.07.2010 um 22:21 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> > > Seems I've lost the fight against the default ON of LYX_INSTALL.
> > >
> > > Peter
> >
> > Now I cannot create the CMake project any
Am Sonntag, den 18.07.2010, 22:33 +0200 schrieb Stephan Witt:
> Am 18.07.2010 um 22:21 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
>
> > Seems I've lost the fight against the default ON of LYX_INSTALL.
> >
> > Peter
>
> Now I cannot create the CMake project anymore because of missing
> AIKSAURUSLIB...
Same here. Y
Am 18.07.2010 um 22:33 schrieb Stephan Witt:
> Am 18.07.2010 um 22:21 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
>
>> Seems I've lost the fight against the default ON of LYX_INSTALL.
>>
>> Peter
>
> Now I cannot create the CMake project anymore because of missing
> AIKSAURUSLIB...
To be more verbose:
% sh mkcm
Am 18.07.2010 um 22:21 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> Seems I've lost the fight against the default ON of LYX_INSTALL.
>
> Peter
Now I cannot create the CMake project anymore because of missing AIKSAURUSLIB...
Stephan
Seems I've lost the fight against the default ON of LYX_INSTALL.
Peter
Am Sonntag, den 18.07.2010, 13:21 +0200 schrieb Kornel Benko:
> Am Sonntag 18 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> > Is it possible to move all package/install code
> > into a single block within the cmake file? We should
> > really try to cleanup this file.
> >
> > Peter
>
> I like the install comm
Am Sonntag 18 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> Is it possible to move all package/install code
> into a single block within the cmake file? We should
> really try to cleanup this file.
>
> Peter
I like the install commands at the same place, as are the create defintions :(
But yes, it is not con
Am Sonntag 18 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> Kornel Benko wrote:
> > Am Sonntag 18 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> >> Kornel Benko wrote:
> > ...
> >
> >>> Even if LYX_NLS were set?
> >>
> >> Ah, shouldn't we then include CPack only when LYX_NLS is set?
> >
> > After a second thought, I thi
Peter Kümmel wrote:
> Kornel Benko wrote:
>> Am Sonntag 18 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
>>> Kornel Benko wrote:
>> ...
Even if LYX_NLS were set?
>>> Ah, shouldn't we then include CPack only when LYX_NLS is set?
>>>
>> After a second thought, I think that having LYX_CPACK option is ok.
>>
>>
Is it possible to move all package/install code
into a single block within the cmake file? We should
really try to cleanup this file.
Peter
Kornel Benko wrote:
> Am Sonntag 18 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
>> Kornel Benko wrote:
> ...
>>> Even if LYX_NLS were set?
>> Ah, shouldn't we then include CPack only when LYX_NLS is set?
>>
>
> After a second thought, I think that having LYX_CPACK option is ok.
>
> This would _imply_ LYX_INS
Am Sonntag 18 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> Kornel Benko wrote:
...
> > Even if LYX_NLS were set?
>
> Ah, shouldn't we then include CPack only when LYX_NLS is set?
>
After a second thought, I think that having LYX_CPACK option is ok.
This would _imply_ LYX_INSTALL , not the other way.
We c
Kornel Benko wrote:
> Am Sonntag 18 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
>> Kornel Benko wrote:
>>> Am Samstag 17 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
Kornel Benko wrote:
> Peter, why is now
>
> include(CPack)
>
> allowed ony if "LYX_INSTALL" is set?
Is it a problem to set LYX
Am Sonntag 18 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> Kornel Benko wrote:
> > Am Samstag 17 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> >> Kornel Benko wrote:
> >>> Peter, why is now
> >>>
> >>> include(CPack)
> >>>
> >>> allowed ony if "LYX_INSTALL" is set?
> >>
> >> Is it a problem to set LYX_INSTALL when p
Kornel Benko wrote:
> Am Samstag 17 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
>> Kornel Benko wrote:
>>> Peter, why is now
>>>
>>> include(CPack)
Is it possible to check for nist on Windows, or to
enable zip by default?
Joost, have you tried to build your installer with cmake.
Maybe it is possible to t
Kornel Benko wrote:
> Am Samstag 17 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
>> Kornel Benko wrote:
>>> Peter, why is now
>>>
>>> include(CPack)
>>>
>>> allowed ony if "LYX_INSTALL" is set?
>> Is it a problem to set LYX_INSTALL when packaging
>> is required? Then we could a a new option.
>
> Please do
Am Samstag 17 Juli 2010 schrieb Peter Kümmel:
> Kornel Benko wrote:
> > Peter, why is now
> >
> > include(CPack)
> >
> > allowed ony if "LYX_INSTALL" is set?
>
> Is it a problem to set LYX_INSTALL when packaging
> is required? Then we could a a new option.
Please do not. We already have man
Kornel Benko wrote:
> Peter, why is now
> include(CPack)
> allowed ony if "LYX_INSTALL" is set?
Is it a problem to set LYX_INSTALL when packaging
is required? Then we could a a new option.
>
> Now is the belowed call
> make package
> crippled.
>
> IMHO It does not harm to have in un
22 matches
Mail list logo