Porting from macro_log_feature without a package to FeatureSummary?

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 08:18:55 PM Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The current feature_summary seems to require a package. Things like this
> work:
> 
> find_package(Foo)
> set_package_properties(Foo ...)
> 
> But in solid we have:
> 
> find_program(BISON_EXECUTABLE bison) # ### Not find_package
> macro_log_feature(bison ...)
> 
> 
> Two ways out are:
> 
> * Add an equivalent feature to cmake
> * Add a FindBison.cmake and find the package.
> 
> 
> 
> Regardless of whether cmake is modified to make this easier, I think we
> should have a FindBison anyway.
> 
> What do you think?

What comes to my mind:
* FeatureSummary.cmake is the one file where I didn't document the changes 
from MacroLogFeature.cmake yet

* is that maybe already possible
add_feature_info() could be used to do that I think.

* how should using find_program/library/file/path() be interpreted as opposed 
to using find_package() ?

One could argue that find_program() and friends are only for looking for 
implementation details, which should not be major features which need to be 
represented to the user at the end of the cmake run.
And in general, having a FindBison.cmake sounds good.

Alex