On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 10:02 +0200, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> So it has come to pass: CMake can do stuff that automake can not
> do.
>
> This is what we feared :-)
>
> Should we embrace CMake as providing features that automake doesn't
> do or should we insist that automake is updated?
I would say
On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 20:25 -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
> Fixes some problems. Has worked on OS2, Linux, Windows, Cygwin now.
>
> It generates both openocd executable and also now a libopen-ocd.so file
> for folks wanting to make a shared object / DLL. That would be me. I
> think I want to
So it has come to pass: CMake can do stuff that automake can not
do.
This is what we feared :-)
Should we embrace CMake as providing features that automake doesn't
do or should we insist that automake is updated?
Personally I don't need those new features, but if you dig to the
depths of the mai
Fixes some problems. Has worked on OS2, Linux, Windows, Cygwin now.
It generates both openocd executable and also now a libopen-ocd.so file
for folks wanting to make a shared object / DLL. That would be me. I
think I want to call it from Java now. So I will probably adding a SWIG
file sep
