[CMake] Visual Studio and Windows Mobile SDKs

[Andreas Pokorny]

Hello,
Thank you for the review. I will not be able to apply the changes this month.
Right now other things are important for our project.
Maybe someone else has time to improve the files. I expect that our project
schedule will force us to support wince at the end of august. Some time before
that we will invest more time to get everything setup in a clean way.

kind regards
Andreas Pokorny


2008/7/6 Alexander Neundorf <a.neundorf-work at gmx.net>:
> On Monday 30 June 2008, Andreas Pokorny wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Why is there a Windows-cl.cmake and no Window-msvc.cmake?
>
> In cmake < 2.6 this filename was composed from CMAKE_SYSTEM_NAME and the
> basename of the compiler (cl.exe, also with Visual Studio).
> In cmake 2.6 this was extended and now compilers can be identified more
> reliable by building a very simple test program which gives the "compiler
> id". This has the advantage that it is e.g. possible to differentiate between
> different "cc"s and also to detect the same compiler family even if the
> executable has a different name (e.g. arm-elf-gcc and gcc).
> For the MS compiler this compiler id is "MSVC".
> The file with the compiler id in the name is preferred over the one using the
> basename.
>
>> Shall I include things like Platform/cl inside a WinCE-msvc file?
>
> Yes. If the file doesn't work for WinCE, it should be modified to become more
> flexible.
>
>> Will I need both
>> WinCE-MSVC-C-YourHardware.cmake
>> and
>> WinCE-MSVC-CXX-YourHardware.cmake?
>
> If you need the hardware-specific files, yes.
> (but are also not-recommended ways how to do this (like using
> WinCE-cl-YourHardware.cmake or by putting everything in the C file and then
> relying on the unspecified behaviour that the C stuff is loaded by cmake
> before the CXX files).
>
>> I have attached the current status, it would be nice if you could
>> review the changes.
>
> WinCE-cl.cmake:
>
> You should split this into
> WinCE-MSVC-C.cmake and WinCE-MSVC-CXX.cmake so it follows the new style of
> naming.
> Are the tests for the different compiler versions and the default flags used
> for them correct also for the cross compilers ?
> If yes, it would be nice if you could split this out into a file which is then
> used both by Win-cl.cmake and WinCE-cl.cmake.
>
> WinCE-MSVC-C-ARMV4I.cmake
> WinCE-MSVC-CXX-ARMV4I.cmake
>
> Hmm, they look quite general. Are the settings in these files required for
> everybody who will use that architecture ?
> Then it would be better to do handle this in the WinCE-MSVC-C[XX].cmake files.
> Is it possible to determine the architecture detailled enough from the
> compiler ? E.g. from the name (clarm.exe ?) or by building a small test
> program and checking for something in it, as it is done for the compiler id ?
> (see Modules/CMakeCCompilerId.c.in)
>
> Also a variable like WINCE_PROCESSOR could be introduced, which would hae to
> be set in the toolchain file and which could be evaluate in the
> platform-compiler file. Have a look at
> Modules/Platform/Generic-ADSP-Common.cmake file to see how this is done
> there.
>
> Alex
> _______________________________________________
> CMake mailing list
> CMake at cmake.org
> http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
>