[Insight-developers] cmake version of the Insigh Journal Automatic Testing System seems to be 2.0

[Bill Lorensen]

As  Bill suggested, we should discuss the implicatons of upgrading to
cmake2.2. I have been using it for my personal builds for some time now.
Overall, I think it is a a big improvement, especially since it handles
dependencies so much better.

There are a couple of caveats (not criticisms);
1) Seems that cmake2.2 has closed a number of holes in the older cmakes. I
noticed while trying to build slicer2, that cmake2.2 strictly enforces that
${}'s be used to evaluate variables. Somehow in the past, cmake expanded
variables that did not have ${}.
2) The build directory structure is very different. Of course, no one
shouold be depending on how the .obj files are stored.
3) The LINK_LIBRARIES command seems to work (or not work) differently). I
switced the slicer2 CMakeLists.txt files to use TARGET_LINK_LIBRARIES, which
I believe is preferred anyway.


I suggest we open a Wiki page to discuss the issues of upgrading to CMake2.2
.

Bill


On 3/27/06, William A. Hoffman <billlist at nycap.rr.com> wrote:
>
> At 11:17 AM 3/27/2006, Julien Jomier wrote:
> >If we want to support the new wrappers in the next release it might be a
> good idea to make ITK depend on CMake 2.2. I guess this will be subject to
> future discussions.
> >
> >We can have a flag for the testing environment specifying which version
> of CMake we should use (like we have for ITK, VTK, etc...), then it will be
> up to the technical committee to decide what to do with the new code that
> requires new release of third-party packages. At least users will be able to
> download the code from the IJ and try it out.
>
> It should depend on what the most current release of ITK depended on.
> That is the point
> of not using cvs ITK in IJ.   I don't think a switch is a good idea.  It
> just complicates
> the build environment for IJ.  It should use only one version of
> cmake.  If that version
> is 2.2, then fine, it should be able to build the most recent ITK anyway.
> I guess this is a job for the ISC?
>
>
> -Bill
>
> _______________________________________________
> Insight-developers mailing list
> Insight-developers at itk.org
> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.itk.org/mailman/private/insight-developers/attachments/20060327/79f7e06b/attachment.htm