Menu
▾
▴
xml-cppdom-devel — Developer list
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2002 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(3) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 |
Jan
(6) |
Feb
(1) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(2) |
Dec
|
| 2004 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2005 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2006 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(2) |
May
|
Jun
(4) |
Jul
(7) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(5) |
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(2) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(6) |
Feb
(14) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(12) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(9) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2008 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(3) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(3) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
|
| 2009 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(9) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(4) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2010 |
Jan
|
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
(6) |
May
(2) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(4) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2011 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(9) |
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2012 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
(11) |
Aug
(3) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(4) |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-12-11 21:49:15
|
Hey Ryan, I think this commit: > Configuring into the source tree is poor style - redirect to binary tree. is a matter of preference. I have not seen nor read where that is "poor style". I am guessing that is in the eye of the beholder.... Doug On Dec 11, 2012, at 12:58 PM, Ryan Pavlik wrote: > These are primarily simplifying build system patches, with some compatibility fixes built in too. > > For handy browsing, consider the compare view here: > https://github.com/rpavlik/cppdom/compare/vancegroup-mirrors:1.2...rpavlik:1.2-improvements > https://github.com/rpavlik/cppdom/compare/trunk-improvements > > I've attached zipped-up "git format-patch" output - should be able to just apply it in SVN. Here's the first line of each log message: > > • 884d3ab812291c56b116cea0cbc9945288afd05a Combine all set_target_properties calls. > • d3b4457fd0119ccb468cd26bf69ed1f380af1dff Configuring into the source tree is poor style - redirect to binary tree. > • 3e742afa9a827cd3842c77f7ac73dd2299aeca51 Remove trailing spaces > • 1ea3e3836b99dec7158a9db39a831a0e1f6f200f Don't duplicate cmake's effort: use what it knows for the flagpoll file. > • ca950e272b04456e2dd9521bb86a3f704a5b7346 MSVC isn't the only windows compiler, but it is the only one that likes pragma warning( disable > • d5af97bf4a1ecb0d0f54e9e6722983127841826f The defines are _WIN32 and _WIN64 > • 64acce890884081ba95ddfc3080ba980fc7ba93a Add the CMakePackageConfigHelpers.cmake file from CMake 2.8.10. > • e533946c6ab041509c8835c8b8fd9f1096740fd5 Make the Flagpoll section visually different. > • 2f5c9961949eefadffa74db8c5072dcd23676e54 Add info as to why the bit-width workaroudn will fail. > > > -- > Ryan Pavlik > HCI Graduate Student > Virtual Reality Applications Center > Iowa State University > > rp...@ia... > http://academic.cleardefinition.com > <trunk.tar.gz><1.2.tar.gz>------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial > Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support > Improve your efficiency, and focus on delivering more value-add services > Discover what IT Professionals Know. Rescue delivers > http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein_12329d2d_______________________________________________ > Xml-cppdom-devel mailing list > Xml...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xml-cppdom-devel |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-12-11 21:45:36
|
Hey Ryan, On the commit to add CMakePackageConfigHelpers.cmake to the repo, can you explain why this is needed? The file is distributed with CMake so I am unsure why we need to replicate what is in a CMake distribution. Doug On Dec 11, 2012, at 12:58 PM, Ryan Pavlik wrote: > These are primarily simplifying build system patches, with some compatibility fixes built in too. > > For handy browsing, consider the compare view here: > https://github.com/rpavlik/cppdom/compare/vancegroup-mirrors:1.2...rpavlik:1.2-improvements > https://github.com/rpavlik/cppdom/compare/trunk-improvements > > I've attached zipped-up "git format-patch" output - should be able to just apply it in SVN. Here's the first line of each log message: > > • 884d3ab812291c56b116cea0cbc9945288afd05a Combine all set_target_properties calls. > • d3b4457fd0119ccb468cd26bf69ed1f380af1dff Configuring into the source tree is poor style - redirect to binary tree. > • 3e742afa9a827cd3842c77f7ac73dd2299aeca51 Remove trailing spaces > • 1ea3e3836b99dec7158a9db39a831a0e1f6f200f Don't duplicate cmake's effort: use what it knows for the flagpoll file. > • ca950e272b04456e2dd9521bb86a3f704a5b7346 MSVC isn't the only windows compiler, but it is the only one that likes pragma warning( disable > • d5af97bf4a1ecb0d0f54e9e6722983127841826f The defines are _WIN32 and _WIN64 > • 64acce890884081ba95ddfc3080ba980fc7ba93a Add the CMakePackageConfigHelpers.cmake file from CMake 2.8.10. > • e533946c6ab041509c8835c8b8fd9f1096740fd5 Make the Flagpoll section visually different. > • 2f5c9961949eefadffa74db8c5072dcd23676e54 Add info as to why the bit-width workaroudn will fail. > |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-08-28 13:22:22
|
Yet another patch to resolve cmake issues.... This one resolves the construction of the fpc file on windows. Doug |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-08-06 02:23:15
|
Here is a patch that corrects where the flagpoll and cmake build files are places on windows in the install target. Doug |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-08-03 14:23:02
|
Here is hopefully the last patch. This corrects the flagpoll creation when using the clang compiler. Doug On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Doug McCorkle <mc...@ia...> wrote: > I am using new function macros that became available in 2.8.8. > > Doug > > On Jul 31, 2012, at 12:37 PM, Ryan Pavlik wrote: > >> Is there any particular reason that the minimum required cmake version was changed here in line 6: >> https://github.com/vancegroup/cppdom/blame/master/CMakeLists.txt >> >> I certainly haven't added anything that needs 2.8.8 - it should work with 2.8.0 and probably even with the original value listed there (2.6.2?) In any case, having that value higher than necessary breaks more builds than necessary. >> >> Ryan >> >> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Doug McCorkle <mc...@ia...> wrote: >> >> On Jul 27, 2012, at 8:49 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >> >> > >> > On Jul 27, 2012, at 5:31 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: >> > >> >> On Jul 27, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Doug McCorkle <mc...@ia...> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>>> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>> cppdom-config is a legacy script that wraps flagpoll usage. I don't know how important it is at this point, but installing it would maintain consistency with the SCons build. >> >>>> >> >>>> OK, I can get it in. >> >>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> What qualifies as CMake cruft? >> >>>> All of the find scripts and compiler check files that are not needed/used for the cppdom build. >> >>>> >> >>>>> I just grabbed everything from the Git repository. I don't think that I committed anything extra by mistake, but I don't have a good eye for what is critical for CMake to do its job. >> >>>> You did grab everything correctly. I checked with Ryan and he is alright with getting that directory cleaned up. I will go through and create a patch for it. >> >>> >> >>> Here is the first patch to cleanup the CMake scripts. I will work on adding a couple other things to the CMake build to make version tracking a bit easier and to ease using cppdom in third party projects. >> >>> >> >>> www.vrac.iastate.edu/~mccdo/CMakeCleanup.patch >> >> >> >> >> >> I applied your patch to the trunk and to the 1.2 branch. Thanks for taking the time to prepare that. >> > >> > This patch: >> > 1. Adds the cppdom-config back to the install target >> > 2. Corrects the usage of lib and lib64 install directories based on the build type >> > 3. Builds a version.h file based on the version info in the CMake scripts (this officially breaks the SCons build) >> > 4. Only installs the SpiritParser.h file if it is compiled into the library >> >> Here is a patch to follow on to rev 703. This patch: >> >> 1. Removes hard tabs from the CMake files >> 2. Adds helper files to the CMake build to make it easier to find in other CMake projects >> 3. Adds versioned library files back to the build >> 4. Places the flagpoll file in the lib directory rather than the share directory >> >> >From my testing that puts the build back to where SCons was. In my opinion the SCons files could be deleted at this point. >> >> Doug >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Live Security Virtual Conference >> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and >> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions >> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware >> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ >> _______________________________________________ >> Xml-cppdom-devel mailing list >> Xml...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xml-cppdom-devel >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Ryan Pavlik >> HCI Graduate Student >> Virtual Reality Applications Center >> Iowa State University >> >> rp...@ia... >> http://academic.cleardefinition.com >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Live Security Virtual Conference >> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and >> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions >> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware >> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/_______________________________________________ >> Xml-cppdom-devel mailing list >> Xml...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xml-cppdom-devel > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Xml-cppdom-devel mailing list > Xml...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xml-cppdom-devel |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-07-31 18:17:46
|
I am using new function macros that became available in 2.8.8. Doug On Jul 31, 2012, at 12:37 PM, Ryan Pavlik wrote: > Is there any particular reason that the minimum required cmake version was changed here in line 6: > https://github.com/vancegroup/cppdom/blame/master/CMakeLists.txt > > I certainly haven't added anything that needs 2.8.8 - it should work with 2.8.0 and probably even with the original value listed there (2.6.2?) In any case, having that value higher than necessary breaks more builds than necessary. > > Ryan > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Doug McCorkle <mc...@ia...> wrote: > > On Jul 27, 2012, at 8:49 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > > > > > On Jul 27, 2012, at 5:31 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > > > >> On Jul 27, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Doug McCorkle <mc...@ia...> wrote: > >> > >>> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> cppdom-config is a legacy script that wraps flagpoll usage. I don't know how important it is at this point, but installing it would maintain consistency with the SCons build. > >>>> > >>>> OK, I can get it in. > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> What qualifies as CMake cruft? > >>>> All of the find scripts and compiler check files that are not needed/used for the cppdom build. > >>>> > >>>>> I just grabbed everything from the Git repository. I don't think that I committed anything extra by mistake, but I don't have a good eye for what is critical for CMake to do its job. > >>>> You did grab everything correctly. I checked with Ryan and he is alright with getting that directory cleaned up. I will go through and create a patch for it. > >>> > >>> Here is the first patch to cleanup the CMake scripts. I will work on adding a couple other things to the CMake build to make version tracking a bit easier and to ease using cppdom in third party projects. > >>> > >>> www.vrac.iastate.edu/~mccdo/CMakeCleanup.patch > >> > >> > >> I applied your patch to the trunk and to the 1.2 branch. Thanks for taking the time to prepare that. > > > > This patch: > > 1. Adds the cppdom-config back to the install target > > 2. Corrects the usage of lib and lib64 install directories based on the build type > > 3. Builds a version.h file based on the version info in the CMake scripts (this officially breaks the SCons build) > > 4. Only installs the SpiritParser.h file if it is compiled into the library > > Here is a patch to follow on to rev 703. This patch: > > 1. Removes hard tabs from the CMake files > 2. Adds helper files to the CMake build to make it easier to find in other CMake projects > 3. Adds versioned library files back to the build > 4. Places the flagpoll file in the lib directory rather than the share directory > > >From my testing that puts the build back to where SCons was. In my opinion the SCons files could be deleted at this point. > > Doug > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Xml-cppdom-devel mailing list > Xml...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xml-cppdom-devel > > > > > -- > Ryan Pavlik > HCI Graduate Student > Virtual Reality Applications Center > Iowa State University > > rp...@ia... > http://academic.cleardefinition.com > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/_______________________________________________ > Xml-cppdom-devel mailing list > Xml...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xml-cppdom-devel |
|
From: Ryan P. <rp...@ia...> - 2012-07-31 18:06:28
|
Is there any particular reason that the minimum required cmake version was changed here in line 6: https://github.com/vancegroup/cppdom/blame/master/CMakeLists.txt I certainly haven't added anything that needs 2.8.8 - it should work with 2.8.0 and probably even with the original value listed there (2.6.2?) In any case, having that value higher than necessary breaks more builds than necessary. Ryan On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Doug McCorkle <mc...@ia...> wrote: > > On Jul 27, 2012, at 8:49 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > > > > > On Jul 27, 2012, at 5:31 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > > > >> On Jul 27, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Doug McCorkle <mc...@ia...> wrote: > >> > >>> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> cppdom-config is a legacy script that wraps flagpoll usage. I don't > know how important it is at this point, but installing it would maintain > consistency with the SCons build. > >>>> > >>>> OK, I can get it in. > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> What qualifies as CMake cruft? > >>>> All of the find scripts and compiler check files that are not > needed/used for the cppdom build. > >>>> > >>>>> I just grabbed everything from the Git repository. I don't think > that I committed anything extra by mistake, but I don't have a good eye for > what is critical for CMake to do its job. > >>>> You did grab everything correctly. I checked with Ryan and he is > alright with getting that directory cleaned up. I will go through and > create a patch for it. > >>> > >>> Here is the first patch to cleanup the CMake scripts. I will work on > adding a couple other things to the CMake build to make version tracking a > bit easier and to ease using cppdom in third party projects. > >>> > >>> www.vrac.iastate.edu/~mccdo/CMakeCleanup.patch > >> > >> > >> I applied your patch to the trunk and to the 1.2 branch. Thanks for > taking the time to prepare that. > > > > This patch: > > 1. Adds the cppdom-config back to the install target > > 2. Corrects the usage of lib and lib64 install directories based on the > build type > > 3. Builds a version.h file based on the version info in the CMake > scripts (this officially breaks the SCons build) > > 4. Only installs the SpiritParser.h file if it is compiled into the > library > > Here is a patch to follow on to rev 703. This patch: > > 1. Removes hard tabs from the CMake files > 2. Adds helper files to the CMake build to make it easier to find in other > CMake projects > 3. Adds versioned library files back to the build > 4. Places the flagpoll file in the lib directory rather than the share > directory > > From my testing that puts the build back to where SCons was. In my opinion > the SCons files could be deleted at this point. > > Doug > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Xml-cppdom-devel mailing list > Xml...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xml-cppdom-devel > > -- Ryan Pavlik HCI Graduate Student Virtual Reality Applications Center Iowa State University rp...@ia... http://academic.cleardefinition.com |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-07-30 15:18:24
|
On Jul 27, 2012, at 8:49 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > > On Jul 27, 2012, at 5:31 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > >> On Jul 27, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Doug McCorkle <mc...@ia...> wrote: >> >>> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: >>>> >>>>> cppdom-config is a legacy script that wraps flagpoll usage. I don't know how important it is at this point, but installing it would maintain consistency with the SCons build. >>>> >>>> OK, I can get it in. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> What qualifies as CMake cruft? >>>> All of the find scripts and compiler check files that are not needed/used for the cppdom build. >>>> >>>>> I just grabbed everything from the Git repository. I don't think that I committed anything extra by mistake, but I don't have a good eye for what is critical for CMake to do its job. >>>> You did grab everything correctly. I checked with Ryan and he is alright with getting that directory cleaned up. I will go through and create a patch for it. >>> >>> Here is the first patch to cleanup the CMake scripts. I will work on adding a couple other things to the CMake build to make version tracking a bit easier and to ease using cppdom in third party projects. >>> >>> www.vrac.iastate.edu/~mccdo/CMakeCleanup.patch >> >> >> I applied your patch to the trunk and to the 1.2 branch. Thanks for taking the time to prepare that. > > This patch: > 1. Adds the cppdom-config back to the install target > 2. Corrects the usage of lib and lib64 install directories based on the build type > 3. Builds a version.h file based on the version info in the CMake scripts (this officially breaks the SCons build) > 4. Only installs the SpiritParser.h file if it is compiled into the library Here is a patch to follow on to rev 703. This patch: 1. Removes hard tabs from the CMake files 2. Adds helper files to the CMake build to make it easier to find in other CMake projects 3. Adds versioned library files back to the build 4. Places the flagpoll file in the lib directory rather than the share directory From my testing that puts the build back to where SCons was. In my opinion the SCons files could be deleted at this point. Doug |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-07-28 01:49:36
|
On Jul 27, 2012, at 5:31 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > On Jul 27, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Doug McCorkle <mc...@ia...> wrote: > >> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: >>> >>>> cppdom-config is a legacy script that wraps flagpoll usage. I don't know how important it is at this point, but installing it would maintain consistency with the SCons build. >>> >>> OK, I can get it in. >>> >>>> >>>> What qualifies as CMake cruft? >>> All of the find scripts and compiler check files that are not needed/used for the cppdom build. >>> >>>> I just grabbed everything from the Git repository. I don't think that I committed anything extra by mistake, but I don't have a good eye for what is critical for CMake to do its job. >>> You did grab everything correctly. I checked with Ryan and he is alright with getting that directory cleaned up. I will go through and create a patch for it. >> >> Here is the first patch to cleanup the CMake scripts. I will work on adding a couple other things to the CMake build to make version tracking a bit easier and to ease using cppdom in third party projects. >> >> www.vrac.iastate.edu/~mccdo/CMakeCleanup.patch > > > I applied your patch to the trunk and to the 1.2 branch. Thanks for taking the time to prepare that. This patch: 1. Adds the cppdom-config back to the install target 2. Corrects the usage of lib and lib64 install directories based on the build type 3. Builds a version.h file based on the version info in the CMake scripts (this officially breaks the SCons build) 4. Only installs the SpiritParser.h file if it is compiled into the library Doug |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-07-28 01:19:39
|
On Jul 27, 2012, at 5:31 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > On Jul 27, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Doug McCorkle <mc...@ia...> wrote: > >> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: >>> >>>> cppdom-config is a legacy script that wraps flagpoll usage. I don't know how important it is at this point, but installing it would maintain consistency with the SCons build. >>> >>> OK, I can get it in. >>> >>>> >>>> What qualifies as CMake cruft? >>> All of the find scripts and compiler check files that are not needed/used for the cppdom build. >>> >>>> I just grabbed everything from the Git repository. I don't think that I committed anything extra by mistake, but I don't have a good eye for what is critical for CMake to do its job. >>> You did grab everything correctly. I checked with Ryan and he is alright with getting that directory cleaned up. I will go through and create a patch for it. >> >> Here is the first patch to cleanup the CMake scripts. I will work on adding a couple other things to the CMake build to make version tracking a bit easier and to ease using cppdom in third party projects. >> >> www.vrac.iastate.edu/~mccdo/CMakeCleanup.patch > > > I applied your patch to the trunk and to the 1.2 branch. Thanks for taking the time to prepare that. Thanks Patrick. It appears that the deletion of the sub directories in the cmake directory did not make it into the patch for some reason. Could you delete all of the sub directories that are currently in the cmake directory? Thanks. Doug |
|
From: Patrick H. <pat...@gm...> - 2012-07-27 22:31:29
|
On Jul 27, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Doug McCorkle <mc...@ia...> wrote: > On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > >> >> On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: >> >>> cppdom-config is a legacy script that wraps flagpoll usage. I don't know how important it is at this point, but installing it would maintain consistency with the SCons build. >> >> OK, I can get it in. >> >>> >>> What qualifies as CMake cruft? >> All of the find scripts and compiler check files that are not needed/used for the cppdom build. >> >>> I just grabbed everything from the Git repository. I don't think that I committed anything extra by mistake, but I don't have a good eye for what is critical for CMake to do its job. >> You did grab everything correctly. I checked with Ryan and he is alright with getting that directory cleaned up. I will go through and create a patch for it. > > Here is the first patch to cleanup the CMake scripts. I will work on adding a couple other things to the CMake build to make version tracking a bit easier and to ease using cppdom in third party projects. > > www.vrac.iastate.edu/~mccdo/CMakeCleanup.patch I applied your patch to the trunk and to the 1.2 branch. Thanks for taking the time to prepare that. -Patrick -- Patrick L. Hartling iOS Library Developer, Banno http://www.banno.com/ |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-07-27 19:52:26
|
On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > > On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > >> cppdom-config is a legacy script that wraps flagpoll usage. I don't know how important it is at this point, but installing it would maintain consistency with the SCons build. > > OK, I can get it in. > >> >> What qualifies as CMake cruft? > All of the find scripts and compiler check files that are not needed/used for the cppdom build. > >> I just grabbed everything from the Git repository. I don't think that I committed anything extra by mistake, but I don't have a good eye for what is critical for CMake to do its job. > You did grab everything correctly. I checked with Ryan and he is alright with getting that directory cleaned up. I will go through and create a patch for it. Here is the first patch to cleanup the CMake scripts. I will work on adding a couple other things to the CMake build to make version tracking a bit easier and to ease using cppdom in third party projects. www.vrac.iastate.edu/~mccdo/CMakeCleanup.patch Doug |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-07-06 20:50:31
|
On Jul 6, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > cppdom-config is a legacy script that wraps flagpoll usage. I don't know how important it is at this point, but installing it would maintain consistency with the SCons build. OK, I can get it in. > > What qualifies as CMake cruft? All of the find scripts and compiler check files that are not needed/used for the cppdom build. > I just grabbed everything from the Git repository. I don't think that I committed anything extra by mistake, but I don't have a good eye for what is critical for CMake to do its job. You did grab everything correctly. I checked with Ryan and he is alright with getting that directory cleaned up. I will go through and create a patch for it. Doug |
|
From: Patrick H. <pat...@gm...> - 2012-07-06 20:36:00
|
cppdom-config is a legacy script that wraps flagpoll usage. I don't know how important it is at this point, but installing it would maintain consistency with the SCons build. What qualifies as CMake cruft? I just grabbed everything from the Git repository. I don't think that I committed anything extra by mistake, but I don't have a good eye for what is critical for CMake to do its job. -Patrick On Jul 6, 2012, at 2:00 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > I tested this out and the build appears OK. It seems that the cppdom-config script is missing from the install target. I am not sure how important this is. I can add it if it is needed. Also, it seems there is a bunch of CMake "cruft" in the cmake directory. Is this needed? > > Doug > > On Jul 4, 2012, at 3:34 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > >> I copied the CMake build into the trunk and the 1.2 branch. If it needs to be added to the 1.0 branch, I can do that quite easily. >> >> -Patrick >> >> On May 25, 2012, at 9:27 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >> >>> Patrick, >>> >>> This seems like a useful thing to merge. There are some recent changes to scons that appear to be wrecking havoc with some of our scons builds so we are also looking at migrating away from scons. If it is merged I can test it and provide patches for things that fail. >>> >>> Doug >>> >>> On Oct 9, 2011, at 9:37 AM, Patrick Hartling wrote: >>> >>>> Due to my regrettably limited time for, well, virtually everything, I hadn't noticed that Ryan Pavlik made a CMake build for CppDOM. I was just looking it over, and while it appears to have a lot of things not needed for building CppDOM, it seems to me that it would be a good addition to CppDOM. I am not sufficiently skilled at reading CMake code to tell if it supports everything that the SCons build does, but to be blunt, I am pretty sick of SCons. Even if the CMake build isn't quite ready to replace the SCons build, I would be glad to see CMake available for building CppDOM. Would it be worthwhile to merge Ryan's CMake build into the CppDOM SVN trunk? If so, I can do the initial merge and checkin. Would anyone have time to add information to the README file explaining how to use this build, possibly promoting it as the preferred alternative to the SCons build? >>>> >>>> -Patrick > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Xml-cppdom-devel mailing list > Xml...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xml-cppdom-devel -- Patrick L. Hartling iOS Library Developer, T8 Webware http://www.t8webware.com/ |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-07-06 19:00:59
|
I tested this out and the build appears OK. It seems that the cppdom-config script is missing from the install target. I am not sure how important this is. I can add it if it is needed. Also, it seems there is a bunch of CMake "cruft" in the cmake directory. Is this needed? Doug On Jul 4, 2012, at 3:34 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > I copied the CMake build into the trunk and the 1.2 branch. If it needs to be added to the 1.0 branch, I can do that quite easily. > > -Patrick > > On May 25, 2012, at 9:27 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > >> Patrick, >> >> This seems like a useful thing to merge. There are some recent changes to scons that appear to be wrecking havoc with some of our scons builds so we are also looking at migrating away from scons. If it is merged I can test it and provide patches for things that fail. >> >> Doug >> >> On Oct 9, 2011, at 9:37 AM, Patrick Hartling wrote: >> >>> Due to my regrettably limited time for, well, virtually everything, I hadn't noticed that Ryan Pavlik made a CMake build for CppDOM. I was just looking it over, and while it appears to have a lot of things not needed for building CppDOM, it seems to me that it would be a good addition to CppDOM. I am not sufficiently skilled at reading CMake code to tell if it supports everything that the SCons build does, but to be blunt, I am pretty sick of SCons. Even if the CMake build isn't quite ready to replace the SCons build, I would be glad to see CMake available for building CppDOM. Would it be worthwhile to merge Ryan's CMake build into the CppDOM SVN trunk? If so, I can do the initial merge and checkin. Would anyone have time to add information to the README file explaining how to use this build, possibly promoting it as the preferred alternative to the SCons build? >>> >>> -Patrick |
|
From: Patrick H. <pat...@gm...> - 2012-07-04 20:34:38
|
I copied the CMake build into the trunk and the 1.2 branch. If it needs to be added to the 1.0 branch, I can do that quite easily. -Patrick On May 25, 2012, at 9:27 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > Patrick, > > This seems like a useful thing to merge. There are some recent changes to scons that appear to be wrecking havoc with some of our scons builds so we are also looking at migrating away from scons. If it is merged I can test it and provide patches for things that fail. > > Doug > > On Oct 9, 2011, at 9:37 AM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > >> Due to my regrettably limited time for, well, virtually everything, I hadn't noticed that Ryan Pavlik made a CMake build for CppDOM. I was just looking it over, and while it appears to have a lot of things not needed for building CppDOM, it seems to me that it would be a good addition to CppDOM. I am not sufficiently skilled at reading CMake code to tell if it supports everything that the SCons build does, but to be blunt, I am pretty sick of SCons. Even if the CMake build isn't quite ready to replace the SCons build, I would be glad to see CMake available for building CppDOM. Would it be worthwhile to merge Ryan's CMake build into the CppDOM SVN trunk? If so, I can do the initial merge and checkin. Would anyone have time to add information to the README file explaining how to use this build, possibly promoting it as the preferred alternative to the SCons build? >> >> -Patrick >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Xml-cppdom-devel mailing list > Xml...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xml-cppdom-devel -- Patrick L. Hartling iOS Library Developer, T8 Webware http://www.t8webware.com/ |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2012-05-26 02:27:25
|
Patrick, This seems like a useful thing to merge. There are some recent changes to scons that appear to be wrecking havoc with some of our scons builds so we are also looking at migrating away from scons. If it is merged I can test it and provide patches for things that fail. Doug On Oct 9, 2011, at 9:37 AM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > Due to my regrettably limited time for, well, virtually everything, I hadn't noticed that Ryan Pavlik made a CMake build for CppDOM. I was just looking it over, and while it appears to have a lot of things not needed for building CppDOM, it seems to me that it would be a good addition to CppDOM. I am not sufficiently skilled at reading CMake code to tell if it supports everything that the SCons build does, but to be blunt, I am pretty sick of SCons. Even if the CMake build isn't quite ready to replace the SCons build, I would be glad to see CMake available for building CppDOM. Would it be worthwhile to merge Ryan's CMake build into the CppDOM SVN trunk? If so, I can do the initial merge and checkin. Would anyone have time to add information to the README file explaining how to use this build, possibly promoting it as the preferred alternative to the SCons build? > > -Patrick > |
|
From: Patrick H. <pat...@gm...> - 2011-10-09 14:38:07
|
Due to my regrettably limited time for, well, virtually everything, I hadn't noticed that Ryan Pavlik made a CMake build for CppDOM. I was just looking it over, and while it appears to have a lot of things not needed for building CppDOM, it seems to me that it would be a good addition to CppDOM. I am not sufficiently skilled at reading CMake code to tell if it supports everything that the SCons build does, but to be blunt, I am pretty sick of SCons. Even if the CMake build isn't quite ready to replace the SCons build, I would be glad to see CMake available for building CppDOM. Would it be worthwhile to merge Ryan's CMake build into the CppDOM SVN trunk? If so, I can do the initial merge and checkin. Would anyone have time to add information to the README file explaining how to use this build, possibly promoting it as the preferred alternative to the SCons build? -Patrick -- Patrick L. Hartling Senior Software Engineer, Priority 5 http://www.priority5.com/ |
|
From: Patrick H. <pat...@gm...> - 2011-05-01 16:27:23
|
CppDOM 1.2.0 has been released. Relative to 1.0.3, the big difference with this version is that SCons 2.0 is now the minimum required version for building the library. There have also been some API documentation improvements. The source for this release can be downloaded here: https://sourceforge.net/projects/xml-cppdom/files/ -Patrick -- Patrick L. Hartling Senior Software Engineer, Priority 5 http://www.priority5.com/ |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2011-04-23 22:28:49
|
On Apr 23, 2011, at 5:10 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > On Apr 11, 2011, at 11:52 AM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > >> >> On Apr 11, 2011, at 9:04 AM, Patrick Hartling wrote: >> >>> On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Patrick Hartling <pat...@gm...> wrote: >>>> On Apr 4, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Apr 4, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:53 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have attached two patches that correct the usage of scons on windows and I added a missing header. >>>>>> >>>>>> What is the minimum required version of SCons after applying the build changes? I haven't been keeping up with SCons API changes/deprecations. >>>>> >>>>> I changed it to 2.0 in the SConstruct. I took the liberty of doing this since I am not sure why anyone would really want to run something older than the latest stable release of SCons. >>>> >>>> I see your point. I am just a little hesitant because there will probably be at least a few people who can't easily update to SCons 2.0. That said, if people do complain about this, we have the option of distributing and using a local SCons within the CppDOM build, right? >>>> >>>> I do not really follow your question. I understand your hesitation though. >>> >>> I just meant that CppDOM could include its own SCons 2.0 local installation if users run into problems with being unable to install SCons 2.0 themselves. >> >> Yes, we could easily do that. Thanks for the clarification. This would also be the same issue with the gmtl patch I submitted. > > I applied the build system patch to the trunk as r678. My thinking is that this gives me a reason to release CppDOM 1.2.0. From looking at the change log, the SCons requirement is really the only difference between 1.0 and 1.2. I need to do a full diff of the trunk and the 1.0 branch to be sure, though. > > Are there any objections to this plan? No, the new release would help me out quite a bit. Doug |
|
From: Patrick H. <pat...@gm...> - 2011-04-23 22:10:23
|
On Apr 11, 2011, at 11:52 AM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > > On Apr 11, 2011, at 9:04 AM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > >> On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Patrick Hartling <pat...@gm...> wrote: >>> On Apr 4, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >>> >>>> On Apr 4, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:53 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hello, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have attached two patches that correct the usage of scons on windows and I added a missing header. >>>>> >>>>> What is the minimum required version of SCons after applying the build changes? I haven't been keeping up with SCons API changes/deprecations. >>>> >>>> I changed it to 2.0 in the SConstruct. I took the liberty of doing this since I am not sure why anyone would really want to run something older than the latest stable release of SCons. >>> >>> I see your point. I am just a little hesitant because there will probably be at least a few people who can't easily update to SCons 2.0. That said, if people do complain about this, we have the option of distributing and using a local SCons within the CppDOM build, right? >>> >>> I do not really follow your question. I understand your hesitation though. >> >> I just meant that CppDOM could include its own SCons 2.0 local installation if users run into problems with being unable to install SCons 2.0 themselves. > > Yes, we could easily do that. Thanks for the clarification. This would also be the same issue with the gmtl patch I submitted. I applied the build system patch to the trunk as r678. My thinking is that this gives me a reason to release CppDOM 1.2.0. From looking at the change log, the SCons requirement is really the only difference between 1.0 and 1.2. I need to do a full diff of the trunk and the 1.0 branch to be sure, though. Are there any objections to this plan? -Patrick -- Patrick L. Hartling Senior Software Engineer, Priority 5 http://www.priority5.com/ |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2011-04-11 16:52:12
|
On Apr 11, 2011, at 9:04 AM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Patrick Hartling <pat...@gm...> wrote: >> On Apr 4, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >> >> > On Apr 4, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: >> > >> >> On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:53 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hello, >> >>> >> >>> I have attached two patches that correct the usage of scons on windows and I added a missing header. >> >> >> >> What is the minimum required version of SCons after applying the build changes? I haven't been keeping up with SCons API changes/deprecations. >> > >> > I changed it to 2.0 in the SConstruct. I took the liberty of doing this since I am not sure why anyone would really want to run something older than the latest stable release of SCons. >> >> I see your point. I am just a little hesitant because there will probably be at least a few people who can't easily update to SCons 2.0. That said, if people do complain about this, we have the option of distributing and using a local SCons within the CppDOM build, right? >> >> I do not really follow your question. I understand your hesitation though. > > I just meant that CppDOM could include its own SCons 2.0 local installation if users run into problems with being unable to install SCons 2.0 themselves. Yes, we could easily do that. Thanks for the clarification. This would also be the same issue with the gmtl patch I submitted. Doug |
|
From: Patrick H. <pat...@gm...> - 2011-04-11 14:05:11
|
On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Patrick Hartling <pat...@gm...> wrote: > On Apr 4, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > > > On Apr 4, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > > > >> On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:53 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > >> > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> I have attached two patches that correct the usage of scons on windows and I added a missing header. > >> > >> What is the minimum required version of SCons after applying the build changes? I haven't been keeping up with SCons API changes/deprecations. > > > > I changed it to 2.0 in the SConstruct. I took the liberty of doing this since I am not sure why anyone would really want to run something older than the latest stable release of SCons. > > I see your point. I am just a little hesitant because there will probably be at least a few people who can't easily update to SCons 2.0. That said, if people do complain about this, we have the option of distributing and using a local SCons within the CppDOM build, right? > > I do not really follow your question. I understand your hesitation though. I just meant that CppDOM could include its own SCons 2.0 local installation if users run into problems with being unable to install SCons 2.0 themselves. -Patrick -- Patrick L. Hartling Senior Software Engineer, Priority 5 http://www.priority5.com/ |
|
From: Doug M. <mc...@ia...> - 2011-04-06 15:57:01
|
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Patrick Hartling < pat...@gm...> wrote: > On Apr 4, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > > > On Apr 4, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > > > >> On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:53 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > >> > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> I have attached two patches that correct the usage of scons on windows > and I added a missing header. > >> > >> What is the minimum required version of SCons after applying the build > changes? I haven't been keeping up with SCons API changes/deprecations. > > > > I changed it to 2.0 in the SConstruct. I took the liberty of doing this > since I am not sure why anyone would really want to run something older than > the latest stable release of SCons. > > I see your point. I am just a little hesitant because there will probably > be at least a few people who can't easily update to SCons 2.0. That said, if > people do complain about this, we have the option of distributing and using > a local SCons within the CppDOM build, right? > > I do not really follow your question. I understand your hesitation though. Doug |
|
From: Patrick H. <pat...@gm...> - 2011-04-06 15:14:04
|
On Apr 4, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: > On Apr 4, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote: > >> On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:53 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I have attached two patches that correct the usage of scons on windows and I added a missing header. >> >> What is the minimum required version of SCons after applying the build changes? I haven't been keeping up with SCons API changes/deprecations. > > I changed it to 2.0 in the SConstruct. I took the liberty of doing this since I am not sure why anyone would really want to run something older than the latest stable release of SCons. I see your point. I am just a little hesitant because there will probably be at least a few people who can't easily update to SCons 2.0. That said, if people do complain about this, we have the option of distributing and using a local SCons within the CppDOM build, right? -Patrick -- Patrick L. Hartling Senior Software Engineer, Priority 5 http://www.priority5.com/ |
2 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
