EXECUTABLE_OUTPUT_PATH for tests

[David Faure]

On Thursday 20 September 2007, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 19.09.07 21:31:39, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > On Wednesday 19 September 2007 20:51, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > ...
> > > Well, I also quite often execute tests manually, especially QtTest based
> > > ones, because that way I can see their full output. And if I'm in
> > > <builddir>/myplugin/ or <builddir>/myplugin/test its much easier to run
> > > test/mytest (or ./mytest) then ../../bin/test_mytest.
> > 
> > I didn't argue that it doesn't make any sense to have the test executables in 
> > the current dir, but that while it makes some sense OTOH it creates an ugly 
> > side effect.
> > 
> > > Anyway, so far we're only 2 people who disagree, I'd say we need a 3rd
> > > opinion :)
> > 
> > Ok, it is possible per target with cmake cvs HEAD:
> > 
> > set_target_properties(mytest PROPERTIES RUNTIME_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY wherever)
> > 
> > If we put this in the macros for the test executables, developers who really 
> > want that can use cmake cvs (which will become 2.6.0). I use it every day, 
> > it's stable.
> 
> Well, I think our devs got more important stuff to do than trying out
> the latest cmake ;) So when CMake 2.6 is released and used by KDE4 then
> this seems to be the best solution.

I'm the one who added the set(...) in every CMakeLists.txt but I didn't
move it to the macro. So: we all agree that setting the output dir is good,
and we all agree that doing it as a directory-wide side-effect is bad,
we only have to agree on the fix. I'm with Andreas: *once* KDE requires
cmake-2.6, let's fix the macro to use set_target_properties. This way we
have no immediate regression and we fix the bug when we can fix it, i.e.
when we require 2.6.

-- 
David Faure, faure at kde.org, sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE,
Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org).