Notes |
|
(0038160)
|
Nils Gladitz
|
2015-03-06 10:46
|
|
|
|
(0038162)
|
Ben Boeckel
|
2015-03-06 11:41
|
|
Possibly. The case I heard about previously (I asked him to report here) had something along the lines of:
add_custom_command(OUTPUT a MAIN_DEPENDENCY dep ...)
add_custom_command(OUTPUT b MAIN_DEPENDENCY dep ...)
add_custom_target(tgt-a DEPENDS a)
add_custom_target(tgt-b DEPENDS b)
which, apparently, added some sort of dependency between a and b due to MAIN_DEPENDENCY. |
|
|
(0038163)
|
Ben Boeckel
|
2015-03-06 11:42
|
|
That report was also in November probably with a release version of CMake (likely 3.0). |
|
|
(0038164)
|
Brad King
|
2015-03-06 11:46
|
|
|
|
(0038165)
|
Nils Gladitz
|
2015-03-06 11:50
|
|
I also had issues with MAIN_DEPENDENCY itself before (I linked 0014550) and the consensus was that FindCUDA.cmake might diagnose this.
Could CMake itself perhaps diagnose this instead?
E.g. new policy that makes it a fatal error when two commands reference the same MAIN_DEPENDENCY? |
|
|
(0038166)
|
Brad King
|
2015-03-06 11:53
|
|
Re 0015434:0038165: Yes, having CMake diagnose it would be good. Make it a policy so that it warns now and can be an error later. |
|
|
(0038180)
|
Nils Gladitz
|
2015-03-09 07:14
|
|
I pushed the "main_dependency_diagnostic" topic for review and merged it to next for testing. |
|
|
(0038349)
|
Nils Gladitz
|
2015-03-27 09:39
|
|
|
|
(0039749)
|
Robert Maynard
|
2015-11-02 09:13
|
|
Closing resolved issues that have not been updated in more than 4 months. |
|