[cmake-developers] User vs CMake include mismatch handling

[David Cole]

On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 8:23 AM, Bill Hoffman <bill.hoffman at kitware.com>wrote:

> On 10/14/2010 2:18 PM, David Cole wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Alexander Neundorf <neundorf at kde.org
>> <mailto:neundorf at kde.org>> wrote:
>>
>>    On Wednesday 13 October 2010, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
>>     > On Wednesday 13 October 2010, Bill Hoffman wrote:
>>     > > So, I think we have to use the new name approach.  Do we want
>>    to call it
>>     > > 2?  Or should we call it something else?
>>     > >
>>     > > Alex, do you have time to do this?
>>     >
>>     > I think it's not a good solution, and the one with
>>    CURRENT_LIST_DIR is
>>     > definitely better and already implemented.
>>     > And I am still convinced that I am right here, see my other mails.
>>
>>    So I would suggest to merge the CURRENT_LIST_DIR branch for 2.8.3,
>>    and as soon
>>    as 2.8.3 is released, remove the full paths again and enable the new
>>    CMP0017
>>    instead (prefer CMAKE_ROOT when include()d from CMAKE_ROOT) and then
>>    see what
>>    happens during the whole 2.8.4 cycle.
>>
>>    I think this (CMP0017) is necessary, because otherwise we can only hope
>>    nothing breaks with future releases (independent from FPHSA).
>>
>>    Alex
>>    _______________________________________________
>>    cmake-developers mailing list
>>    cmake-developers at cmake.org <mailto:cmake-developers at cmake.org>
>>
>>    http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm ok with this since Alex feels so strongly about it, and the code
>> change is restricted to using CMAKE_CURRENT_LIST_DIR only when including
>> FPHSA.cmake... (i.e. -- it should not affect including *other* files
>> from inside of modules that are presently overridden... which was my
>> concern -- that we'd break some *other* scenario -- since that's not
>> true, I retract my objection.)
>>
>> To review the change yourself:
>>   git fetch stage
>>   gitk remotes/stage/AddCMAKE_CURRENT_LIST_DIR
>>
>> Look at the top 3 commits. Looks pretty safe. I'd say we should merge it
>> to 'next' and then after a night on the dashboards, merge it to 'master'
>> and do an rc3 release based on that.
>>
>>
> OK, lets try this one.  Lets move it to next.
>
> -Bill
>
> _______________________________________________
> cmake-developers mailing list
> cmake-developers at cmake.org
> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
>


I'm trying to merge this, and getting conflicts when merging to 'next'
because of changes in cmMakefile.cxx like this:


  this->AddDefinition("CMAKE_CURRENT_LIST_FILE", filenametoread);

<<<<<<< HEAD

  this->MarkVariableAsUsed("CMAKE_CURRENT_LIST_FILE");

=======

  this->AddDefinition("CMAKE_CURRENT_LIST_DIR",


cmSystemTools::GetFilenamePath(filenametoread).c_str());

>>>>>>> AddCMAKE_CURRENT_LIST_DIR



What's the best way to resolve this conflict? Should I delete the
MarkVariableAsUsed lines because they're part of the dev/strict-mode branch
which is *not* going into 2.8.3?


If I leave the MarkVariableAsUsed call in there, does if affect how the
commit will merge to 'master'...?


Arg.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/cmake-developers/attachments/20101015/47fb92b2/attachment.html>