[cmake-developers] Eclipse CDT Managed build

[Paul Smith]

IMO the right place for managing relocatable builds is in the
compiler/linker, not in the build tool.

The compiler/linker should provide options that allow the output to be
relocatable regardless of the contents of the command line.  GCC for
example has -fdebug-prefix-map that will allow you to remove prefixes
from pathnames in debug sections of the output.  Unfortunately this is
only part of the solution since it doesn't help with __FILE__ (for
example).  Nevertheless this is the right direction, rather than
modifying the build system.


On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 14:01 +0000, Bøe, Sebastian wrote:
> Thank you for the warning and support. We would prefer to not
> maintain
> a fork, but I have not been able to find any other technology
> that is suitable.
> 
> For future reference. The intended use-case is for CMake to act 
> as an engine in an IDE project generator solution similar to the
> below
> solutions[0].
> 
> [0] 
> http://start.atmel.com/
> http://www.st.com/en/embedded-software/stm32cube-embedded-software.ht
> ml
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brad King [mailto:brad.king at kitware.com] 
> Sent: 26. januar 2017 14:18
> To: Bøe, Sebastian <Sebastian.Boe at nordicsemi.no>
> Cc: ben.boeckel at kitware.com; cmake-developers at cmake.org
> Subject: Re: [cmake-developers] Eclipse CDT Managed build
> 
> On 01/26/2017 05:57 AM, Bøe, Sebastian wrote:
> > 
> > I will investigate relocatable builds, because in spite of this
> > not 
> > being trivial, I think CMake still comes out as the best suited
> > technology for my use-case.
> 
> We once had an option to produce relative paths in the build system
> and it was a never ending mess of bugs.  Eventually it was ripped
> out.
> It is unlikely we will accept changes to try to re-introduce such an
> option.
> 
> -Brad
>