Notes |
|
(0014037)
|
Bill Hoffman
|
2008-11-05 17:36
|
|
Have you tried CMake 2.6.3 RC 1? |
|
|
(0014045)
|
RW Penney
|
2008-11-06 03:29
|
|
Yes, I have now tried 2.6.3-RC1.
This also fails to find the Boost headers, apparently producing exactly the same dialog window (including suggestions about BOOST_ROOT).
For the time being, I shall be sticking with 2.4.8 (after manually adding 1_35, 1_35_0 etc to the list of versions searched by FindBoost.cmake).
Could the problem have something to do with the different separators used in the version-specific paths on WIN32 versus Linux (e.g. Boost_1_35 versus Boost-1.35)? |
|
|
(0014050)
|
Bill Hoffman
|
2008-11-06 10:11
|
|
I just installed (well untared boost_1_37_0) onto my windows box. If I set BOOST_ROOT=c:/hoffman/Projects/boost_1_37_0, then do this:
project(test)
cmake_minimum_required(VERSION 2.7)
find_package(Boost REQUIRED)
It finds boost no problem. Can you describe the steps you are taking? |
|
|
(0014051)
|
RW Penney
|
2008-11-06 12:02
|
|
I have installed boost_1_35_0 from source using MSVC++9, compiling with 'bjam --build-type=complete' then installing with 'bjam --build-type=complete install'. This installs everything beneath the default path of C:\Boost, so that the 'config.hpp' which FindBoost.cmake searches for, is at 'C:\Boost\include\boost-1_35\boost\config.hpp'.
My CMakeLists.txt contains a very similar recipe to yours, in amongst many other options which I believe should have no impact on FindBoost.cmake. Exactly the same CMakeLists.txt has successfully found a variety of versions of Boost on Linux, OpenBSD, and Windows platforms, although never when I've tried using cmake-2.6 on Windows.
Hopefully you can suggest why Win32 is being so awkward?
Thanks. |
|
|
(0014562)
|
Philip Lowman
|
2009-01-15 01:59
|
|
|
|
(0014605)
|
Philip Lowman
|
2009-01-18 15:24
|
|
I'm pretty sure this issue should be resolved. Please reopen the bug if you encounter any further difficulty with the FindBoost.cmake as checked into CVS. |
|
|
(0015313)
|
Philip Lowman
|
2009-02-23 22:49
|
|
|