On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 10:29 AM, xantares 09 <xantares09@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> ________________________________
> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 10:09:42 -0400
> Subject: Re: Nested cmake?
> From: chmorgan@xxxxxxxxx
> To: libftdi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> On Friday, September 13, 2013, xantares 09 wrote:
>
>
>
>> From: chmorgan@xxxxxxxxx
>> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 09:29:16 -0400
>> Subject: Re: Nested cmake?
>> To: libftdi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 9:18 AM, xantares 09 <xantares09@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> From: chmorgan@xxxxxxxxx
>> >> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 08:33:14 -0400
>> >
>> >> Subject: Re: Nested cmake?
>> >> To: libftdi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 7:53 AM, xantares 09 <xantares09@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> From: chmorgan@xxxxxxxxx
>> >> >> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 06:36:03 -0400
>> >> >> Subject: Re: Nested cmake?
>> >> >> To: libftdi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 6:23 AM, xantares 09
>> >> >> <xantares09@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > ________________________________
>> >> >> > Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 21:48:26 -0400
>> >> >> > Subject: Nested cmake?
>> >> >> > From: chmorgan@xxxxxxxxx
>> >> >> > To: libftdi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Hello.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I was looking at how to use libftdi in the context of a project
>> >> >> > I'm
>> >> >> > working
>> >> >> > on without having to install it to a system directory. The project
>> >> >> > already
>> >> >> > uses cmake and I noticed libftdi does as well.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I was thinking I could just add add_subdirectory() with the
>> >> >> > libftdi
>> >> >> > directory and then retrieve the output library paths from the top
>> >> >> > level
>> >> >> > and
>> >> >> > set global properties so some applications could set their include
>> >> >> > and
>> >> >> > libraries to use the libraries that were built. Is anyone else
>> >> >> > doing
>> >> >> > this?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I added the libftdi directory to my project and did discover some
>> >> >> > issues
>> >> >> > with including the libftdi in the main cmakelists.txt file,
>> >> >> > specifically
>> >> >> > that the libftdi cmake file uses CMAKE_SOURCE_DIR and
>> >> >> > CMAKE_BINARY_DIR
>> >> >> > and
>> >> >> > this is looking for and outputting files relative to the main
>> >> >> > cmake
>> >> >> > file.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Would it be reasonable to make the libftdi cmake files operate
>> >> >> > relative
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > their location? I've made changes locally and everything appears
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > work
>> >> >> > correctly in both the normal case of running using the libftdi
>> >> >> > cmake
>> >> >> > as
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > base file and in my case of nesting it within my larger cmake
>> >> >> > build
>> >> >> > setup.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I'll send a patch tomorrow so it's clear what I mean. I was hoping
>> >> >> > someone
>> >> >> > had some advice on the idea of using the library without
>> >> >> > installing
>> >> >> > it.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Chris
>> >> >Keep it simple ; why not just install a libftdi package together your
>> >> > system pre-requesites ?
> x.
>
>
> We could. I'd have to make one for each of the couple of platforms we build
> on and then figure out how/where to version the package creation scripts.
> Then I'd have to build for each architecture we might run on, arm, x86 32
> bit, x86 64 bit. That seemed more difficult.
>
> I'd also like it to be automatic for the other developers and not
> contaminate their system so installing to usr/local.
>
> It seems like using the library in the build output directory has less side
> effects and no impact on the system in general.
>
> It seems like a tricky issue to me. What if we have a dozen external
> libraries? It's almost like we want to set up a parallel usr/, usr/lib/,
> usr/bin/ etc in the build output directory and install everything there,
> like at /reporoot/build/root/usr/ for instance.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> I'd definitively go for packages, binary packages or at least packages
> sources you can use already exist for debian, rpm, arch, ...
> That's the most clean way, no contamination, automatically installed /
> upgraded, no extra build time, ...
>
> x.
>
I really don't want to get into building binary packages and then
trying to figure out how to distribute and update them, especially
when we have the code and the tools and we need to support a couple
distributions and architectures and are using this stuff internally
only.
The idea of installing to a /repo/build/rootfs/usr make sense? There
must be another sane option other than going the binary package
route....
Chris
--
libftdi - see http://www.intra2net.com/en/developer/libftdi for details.
To unsubscribe send a mail to libftdi+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
