setting EXECUTABLE_OUTPUT_PATH in tier1/ tests ?

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Thursday 10 May 2012, David Faure wrote:
> On Thursday 10 May 2012 22:53:01 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > On Thursday 10 May 2012, David Faure wrote:
> > > On Thursday 10 May 2012 10:36:20 Patrick Spendrin wrote:
> > > > > set(EXECUTABLE_OUTPUT_PATH ${CMAKE_CURRENT_BINARY_DIR})
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, the EXECUTABLE_OUTPUT_PATH should be set per project into the
> > > > project binary_dir\bin
> > > 
> > > As a linux developer, I don't like this. I want to be able to do
> > 
> > In KDE4 kdelibs all executables have always been built into
> > ${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/bin/.
> 
> No, unit tests have always been built into the current directory.
> We are talking about tests here, not about anything else!
> Please look in kdelibs/kdecore/tests and every other dir.

I didn't see them yesterday because I had the tests disabled in that build, 
sorry,

I found we (yes, you and me) had this discussion 4 1/2 years ago already:
http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-buildsystem&m=119032817700787&w=2

> > You could do
> > make && bin/kurltest
> 
> That builds everything first, which is much slower than just building
> kurltest.

Currently, yes.
Once it has been split into separate repositories there shouldn't be much 
difference anymore.
Also you could do
make kurltest && bin/kurltest

Did you try using ninja already ?
It is said that empty builds are much faster than with make.
 
> > then you don't have to care where the executable actually is.
> 
> And when you need to run it in valgrind or gdb? Sorry but you do need to
> care where the executable is.

Yes.
Still, I would consider the rule "all executables are in 
${CMAKE_BINARY_DIR}/bin/" also easy enough ;-)

Alex
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20120511/38d63787/attachment.html>