[Bf-committers] WITH_OPENEXR required in file that defines it afterwards?
shaul.kedem at gmail.com
Mon Dec 15 21:19:33 CET 2008
if we are on the subject of the make; how do you make it dynamically link -
it asks for openal static lib on linux
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Miguel A. Figueroa-Villanueva <
miguelf at ieee.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Chris Want wrote:
> > Miguel A. Figueroa-Villanueva wrote:
> >> If for some reason this can't be modified in this way, then I believe
> >> that the CMakeLists.txt at
> >> source/blender/imbuf/intern/openexr/CMakeLists.txt should be modified
> >> with the following snippet as in other cases throughout the code:
> >> IF(WITH_OPENEXR)
> >> ADD_DEFINITIONS(-DWITH_OPENEXR)
> >> ENDIF(WITH_OPENEXR)
> > I've committed this to SVN since I also don't understand the reason
> > why the various compilation conditions were added to openexr_api.cpp.
> >> I would like to know if the CMake build system is actively maintained?
> >> Are there any docs with bugs or missing features related to the CMake
> >> build? What is the policy to update the minimum required version of
> >> CMake needed to compile blender?
> > I would say that it is actively maintained in the sense that
> > there are some developers who like using it and would like
> > to see it continue. Unfortunately, the developer who initiated
> > the CMake support vanished a couple of years ago, so there
> > isn't strong leadership in this area. As things are, changes
> > to the CMake system happen when either a committer sees a
> > problem that they can solve and fixes it (such as adding a
> > library dependency), or when non-committers such as yourself
> > submits a fix (thanks!).
> Ok. I'll probably be looking at the code and maybe actively developing
> it, so if I get there I can certainly contribute with the cmake files.
> > As for updating the minimum required version needed, there
> > would need to be a compelling reason to do this -- is there
> > a newer feature in CMake that you need?
> Well, I was just curious to know how to contribute and the policies.
> Basically, I was looking at the complexity of the blender code and
> interdependencies. I think that CMake 2.6 brings a lot of features in
> the lines of target dependent properties, functions for scoping, etc.
> But I don't have concrete cases at hand or experience with the build
> process, so I don't think this discussion is worth our time for now.
> In the future, I might bring this up again if there is in fact a
> compelling reason.
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Bf-committers