[CMake] Thoughts on Cross-compiling with CMake

[Alexander Neundorf]

Hi,

On Sunday 29 April 2007 13:41, Bernhard Sputh wrote:
> Trevor,
>
> thank You for the patches You attached.
>
> On Sunday 29 April 2007 18:00, Trevor Kellaway wrote:
> > I was trying not to modify CMake source, given it nicely uses scripts
> > that are easy to change, and more accessible to most people.
>
> Yes, and I think You are right with this approach.
>
> > Patches attached, against 2.4p6 release, but patches created against my
> > Subversion base copy of CMake (sorry):
>
> Should not be a major problem, I will read them and then maybe modify /
> extend them to work with the specific setup I'm having here.
>
> > Note that GenericBuildPrologue.cmake does some nasty non-standard things
> > to CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE (via GENERIC_BUILD_TYPE), setting the style of build
> > based on the output directory name, this is because our existing build
> > system which I'm porting does this. This is *not* the correct CMake way
> > of doing things.
>
> OK, that is good to know for when I try to port the current hack to compile
> XMK (Xilinx Microkernel) code into proper CMake code.
>
> > Nope, mainly because I don't know how to. This project seems unlike
> > others that actively publish bleeding edge builds, all I've found is the
> > main CVS tree (I use Subversion) and this forum, I assume the developers
> > hang out here?
>
> I too think that the developers are actively reading this list, maybe they
> can utilise Your patches for the next version.

Yes, we'll do so (/me being a cmake developer for the next few months) :-)
I'm starting to add cross compiling support to cmake right now and will reuse 
the patches in the next days.
The first step will be to let the user specify the compiler/target platform he 
wants to build for without the cmake automatic detection. This will require  
almost only changes in the script files.

> > CMake is very good once you start to get the hang of it, but it can be
> > an uphill struggle with the lack of documentation at times, which could
> > well put people off.
>
> I agree, but the GNU autotools, are not easy to use either, and I found
> them even harder to use.

Same here.

Bye
Alex