Please review: cmake check for Cagibi
reavertm at gmail.com
Tue Aug 24 20:02:49 CEST 2010
On Tuesday 24 of August 2010 02:34:05 Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> Mardi, le 24 août 2010, à 01:24, Yury G. Kudryashov a écrit:
> > BTW, what about adding one more parameter to m_l_f that tells whether
> > dependency is a runtime dep (default to FALSE)? Or even add another macro
> > because "required" flag MUST be FALSE for runtime dependencies? Then
> > we'll be able to say:
> > == THE FOLLOWING RUNTIME DEPENDENCIES ARE MISSING ON YOUR SYSTEM ==
> That might be indeed most useful and nice to have, I agree (non-packager,
> but self-compiler :) ).
Otherwise listing runtime-only dependencies in README file is just as good
(what said kajonggh does for instance).
It's even better than CMake checks in case all runtime-only dependencies are
met (so no missing deps are reported) - as packager is not aware of them.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-buildsystem/attachments/20100824/f172755d/attachment.sig
More information about the Kde-buildsystem