Please review: cmake check for Cagibi

Friedrich W. H. Kossebau kossebau at
Thu Aug 26 00:00:05 CEST 2010

Mardi, le 24 août 2010, à 22:21, Maciej Mrozowski a écrit:
> On Tuesday 24 of August 2010 21:21:08 Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> > Might be good if this could be standardized.
> > I still like Yury's proposal for that, as it integrates into the log
> > creation, so all dependencies can be seen at one place, no need to search
> > somewhere else. I guess Yury also had the second listing in mind,
> Definitely some macro would be handy. If it was up to me, I wouldn't
> provide separate lists for missing and met runtime dependencies.
> As a packager I'm only concerned what runtime dependencies are needed, and
> not what's actually installed in my build box.

But as a developer I am concerned what is installed in my development box :)

Usecase: want to hack on something, check out the code, run configuration, 
want to see what I need (development includes running the apps :) )

I would be fine with a single list for all runtime deps, but I really also 
want to see if the dep is installed or not. So could you perhaps extend your 
macro with a FOUND flag and add a "(NOT FOUND)" or similar to the output, if 
so? Other than that I would be glad to see your macro added, thanks :)

KDE Okteta - a simple hex editor -

More information about the Kde-buildsystem mailing list