Libart-lgpl moved into a 'src' folder for consistency sake with the other #2
Merged
MicheleC
merged 1 commits from feat/new_src_layer into master 4 years ago
MicheleC
SlavekB
Loading…
Reference in new issue
There is no content yet.
Delete Branch 'feat/new_src_layer'
Deleting a branch is permanent. It CANNOT be undone. Continue?
modules.
Add basic cmake build instructions.
Rework of the README file.
Some cosmetics.
Other than the comment below, it seems good. I did a quick build test and it works, but have not yet done a comparison of the build with the previous versions. Will check that tomorrow.
##### check for the math libcfind_library( MATH_LIBC m )if( MATH_LIBC )Am I missing something or this
just set the variable to itself?
In such case how about something like this:
libm.so is part of libc6 (in debian at least), so most likely the error message should never show up.
Some systems are missing libm, because any math functions in libc like system default library.
Setting
set( MATH_LIBC "${MATH_LIBC}" )is unnecessary because it does not make sense to set a variable to a value of itself. This would only make sense if it was associated with setting the value to the cmake cache. But the cache setting is already done infind_library.I think
mis one of the libraries that can be either standalone or part of the basic libc. Therefore, its absence may not be a problem. Here the question is whether we know which functions it concerns and whether we can test for the presence of such functions in standard libc.The original code was linking against libm (hardcoded). I think for the purpose of this PR we can rework the part above and silently ignore it if MATH_LIBC is not set. Later we can look at which function is required from libm, but we can separate this from this PR, IMO.
What do you think?
Yes, a solution with libm detection is better than with hardcoded linking. Silently ignoring the absence of libm does not seem to be a problem. And if needed, it can be improved later. Therefore, I agree with the state of PR as it is now.
👍
We just need Greg to get rid of that if() and we can merge .
I compared the build from master and from the new branch. It looks ok.
Libart-lgpl moved into a 'src' folder for consistency sake with the otherto WIP:Libart-lgpl moved into a 'src' folder for consistency sake with the other 4 years agoWIP:Libart-lgpl moved into a 'src' folder for consistency sake with the otherto Libart-lgpl moved into a 'src' folder for consistency sake with the other 4 years agoLooks good to me now.
It looks good.
8349a964c2into master 4 years agoThanks Greg!
Reviewers
8349a964c2.