Talk:CMake: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:55, 6 November 2010

An email has been received at VRTS concerning some or all of the text on this page, and can be read as [[ticket:{{{id}}}]] by users with a VRTS account.

However, the message was not sufficient to confirm permission for the text. This may, among other reasons, be because there was no explicit release under a free license, or the email address that the permission came from is not associated with the location where the content was originally published.

For an update on the issue, please contact the user who added this template to the page, someone else with a VRTS account, or the VRT noticeboard. If a valid permission is not provided within 30 days of the first response by a VRT volunteer, the text will be deleted.

Removed the following on the theory that it made it too much like advertising:

Major features

Configuration files are CMake scripts, which use a programming language specialized to software builds, said by its designers to be simple and compact.
Automatic dependency analysis built-in for C, C++, Fortran and Java,
Support of SWIG, Qt, FLTK via the CMake scripting language,
Built-in support for Microsoft Visual Studio .NET and past Visual Studio versions, including generation of .dsp, .dsw, .sln and .vcproj files,
Detection of file content changes using traditional timestamps,
Support for parallel builds,
Cross-compilation,
Global view of all dependencies, using CMake to output a graphviz diagram,
Designed from the ground up for cross-platform builds, and known to work on Linux, other POSIX systems (including AIX, *BSD systems, HP-UX, IRIX/SGI, MinGW/MSYS and Solaris), Mac OS X and Windows 95/98/NT/2000/XP,
Integrated with Dart, CTest and CPack, a collection of tools for software testing and release.

Mark Foskey 19:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability issues regarding Andy Cedilnik and Ken Martin.

Both of these people have Wiki links pointing to no article. Unless someone is prepared to create articles for them - and not just about their work on CMake - then the links will be removed. Sslaxx (talk) 15:45, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicates

Blender is also listed as using SCons! Is it possible it uses the two? I find it hard to belive... 189.87.149.23 (talk)NeoStrider —Preceding undated comment added 00:12, 3 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, it is possible, you just have to write both SConstruct and CMakeLists.txt, then you can use either CMake or SCons to build. Spidermario (talk) 13:59, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Book propaganda

Is the specific book link really interesting on the page? Think just the open documentation references are valid in this case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guaxinim (talk • contribs) 16:15, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved it to being a reference, which I believe is reasonable. I'm not a cmake pro though so if there are better references which should replace it then go ahead... --mcld (talk) 21:36, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who use it

Are you sure, that Conky a SuperTux use cmake? In their last archives is used autotools.--Dundee5 (talk) 14:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SuperTux does have a CMakeLists.txt, at least in its SubVersion repository. However, I didn't find any for Conky. Spidermario (talk) 11:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

permissions from copyright holder

The text marked as possible copyright infringement for the CMake entry on Wikipedia.org is available for use in the discussion of CMake as a software application and solution. As a company we have made this text available for use as part of our corporate messaging. The permissions can be found here: http://cmake.org/cmake/project/press_kit.html

Please contact me if further clarification is needed, Niki Russell (niki.russell@kitware.com) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.194.253.20 (talk) 17:41, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It has been over a week since the last communication of the Wikimedia Foundation's OTRS team to the company about this matter (Ticket:2010102710011944, which is viewable only to individuals who have been cleared to read such content by the WMF), and the requested licensing release has not been supplied. Accordingly, we have had no choice but to delete the material. It can be restored if proper licensing is verified in accordance with that communication. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:55, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 Please contact me if further clarification is needed,
 Niki Russell (niki.russell@kitware.com)  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.194.253.20|66.194.253.20]] ([[User talk:66.194.253.20|talk]]) 17:41, 27 October 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+:It has been over a week since the last communication of the Wikimedia Foundation's OTRS team to the company about this matter ([[Ticket:2010102710011944]], which is viewable only to individuals who have been cleared to read such content by the WMF), and the requested licensing release has not been supplied. Accordingly, we have had no choice but to delete the material. It can be restored if proper licensing is verified in accordance with that communication. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 13:55, 6 November 2010 (UTC)