-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 278
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CI: rescue appveyor config from old-master and backup others #1588
Conversation
359c5bb
to
ce9d87c
Compare
ce9d87c
to
4f2400b
Compare
@@ -133,7 +133,8 @@ set_target_properties( exiv2lib_int PROPERTIES | |||
COMPILE_DEFINITIONS exiv2lib_EXPORTS | |||
) | |||
|
|||
target_link_libraries(exiv2lib_int PRIVATE ZLIB::ZLIB) | |||
# NOTE: Cannot use target_link_libraries on OBJECT libraries with old versions of CMake |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Which CMake version are we stuck with due to older distributions?
Does it maybe make sense to move to a newer one, and simply have the older distributions download a newer version?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On Debian:9 the default CMake version is 3.7 and on CentOS:8 it is 3.11.
I am the first one I would like to use the latest CMake version possible, but in practice I think this would make more difficult for distributions to include the latest Exiv2 version (need to create patches, and so on). But being honest, I am just guessing, I do not know how distribution maintainers consume and generate binaries for each of the distribution packages.
Most of the times (like this one) it is only about tiny details, and the quality of the CMake code does not get affected (too much). If we find a good excuse/reason to require a CMake higher version, we can always discuss it in a separate issue/PR 😁
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sounds reasonable to me! It's always a trade-off :)
As long as it's not impacting our CMake too much I think you are right, no reason to upgrade just yet :)
In this PR I am recovering the Appveyor configuration from
old-master
which is covering more cases than the previous one. Also, the Github PR page is now pointing to the correct Appveyor instance (before it was pointing to some Robin's personal instance).Currently, the Appveyor configuration only had 3 jobs with different versions of Visual Studio and always the same configuration:
I think it is more interesting to have different configurations but use always the latest Visual Studio since we are sure all these versions of Visual Studio fully implement C++11 (The previous configuration was saved at
ci/appveyor_all_vs_versions.yml
as a backup):Thanks to this change I could fix few deffects: