3 ms·
I would argue this confirms what the OP said cmake is really not very friendly to the user (not developer). Reading through the cmake sources for options is equ
by cycomanic 5y ago
I would argue this confirms what the OP said cmake is really not very friendly to the user (not developer). Reading through the cmake sources for options is equivalent to "read the source".
- jcelerier 5y agoBut you only have to do this if you don't want to run an actual GUI or ncurses UI which does this for you for some reason ? What would you suggest instead ?
- cycomanic 5y agoWhy do I need to run a gui or ncurses UI if I just want to do the equivalent of configure && make && make install?
- jcelerier 5y agoThe equivalent of this is cmake -S source_folder -B build_folder cmake --build build_folder cmake --install build_folder You don't need to run a GUI at all for this, I don't see how you could infer this from the previous messages
- tpush 5y agoSomething like 'cmake --list-options CMakeLists.txt' seems the most obvious.
- jcelerier 5y agoI don't think it would be meaningfully different from what you would get by doing less CMakeCache.txt Listing the options cannot be done by just introspecting a CMakeLists: what would it show for: if(FOO) option(ENABLE_BAMBOOZLE_${FOO} "Enable Bamboozle - ${FOO}-specific version" OFF) else() option(ENABLE_BAMBOOZLE "Enable Bamboozle" ON) endif() (and if your meta-build system does not allow to do that, I'm sorry but I'll have to build a meta-meta-build-system on top of it which implements it and no one will like it)