Please note:The SCons wiki is in read-only mode due to ongoing spam/DoS issues. Also, new account creation is currently disabled. We are looking into alternative wiki hosts.
   1 16:33:12 *	Pankrat (n=ludwig@dslb-088-073-195-149.pools.arcor-ip.net) has joined #scons
   2 16:48:08 *	jrandall (n=jim@bas1-london14-1167886910.dsl.bell.ca) has joined #scons
   3 16:50:29 *	garyo-home (n=chatzill@209-6-158-38.c3-0.smr-ubr3.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com) has joined #scons
   4 16:55:36 <GregNoel>	Hi, guys.  Five more minutes to go...
   5 16:57:22 <GregNoel>	Pankrat, can you give us a preview of what you wanted to say for 235?
   6 16:58:21 <Pankrat>	Hi, I have counterexample which does not work correctly with implicit cache activated
   7 16:58:58 <GregNoel>	And you can't add a comment?  What browser are you using?
   8 16:58:59 <Pankrat>	but I cannot post due to some error: "URL was not defined; This may indicate a bug in your browser."
   9 16:59:23 <Pankrat>	Firefox 2.0. I had posted an issue already, which worked
  10 16:59:27 <GregNoel>	And do you have cookies enabled?
  11 16:59:32 <Pankrat>	yes
  12 17:00:02 <GregNoel>	Can you mail it to one of us privately so we can add it?
  13 17:00:23 <Pankrat>	yes, one moment, BTW: I'm Ludwig :)
  14 17:00:41 <GregNoel>	Guten Abend!
  15 17:01:24 *	stevenknight (n=stevenkn@nat/google/x-a4dfaed744b2a8c7) has joined #scons
  16 17:01:31 <stevenknight>	hi all
  17 17:01:36 <GregNoel>	Hey
  18 17:01:39 <Pankrat>	Guten Abend :)
  19 17:01:51 <GregNoel>	Oder Morgen?
  20 17:02:03 *	bdbaddog (n=bdeegan@adsl-66-127-238-122.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net) has joined #scons
  21 17:02:12 <stevenknight>	hey bill
  22 17:02:22 <Pankrat>	both fits, mail has been sent
  23 17:02:31 <bdbaddog>	good evening!
  24 17:02:35 <GregNoel>	Anybody know where Bill and
  25 17:02:46 <GregNoel>	Oops, Bill's here, what about Ken?
  26 17:02:49 <garyo-home>	hi guys
  27 17:03:19 <GregNoel>	G'day!
  28 17:03:40 <garyo-home>	I may be a bit out of it tonight, sorry.
  29 17:03:44 <garyo-home>	But I'm here.
  30 17:03:45 <stevenknight>	does the wiki page link the spreadsheet?
  31 17:03:57 <GregNoel>	Yes, it should
  32 17:04:16 <stevenknight>	oh, duh, there it is
  33 17:04:30 <garyo-home>	So the agenda is starting with Greg's first issue list (391 issues)?
  34 17:04:51 <GregNoel>	Yes, just the first few
  35 17:04:56 <garyo-home>	good.
  36 17:05:26 <bdbaddog>	btw. I think we can chat via google docs and it would get attached to the spreadsheet.
  37 17:05:33 <GregNoel>	1848 is first I believe
  38 17:06:02 <GregNoel>	No, it just seems to display; there's no record (that I could find)
  39 17:06:08 <garyo-home>	bdbaddog: that would be cool but let's try for that next time.
  40 17:06:15 <bdbaddog>	I thought we wer going through the 2002 and then 2003 bugs. which are in the spreadsheets first
  41 17:06:17 <garyo-home>	(if there are records anyway)
  42 17:06:33 <GregNoel>	I'm recording, I hope.
  43 17:06:40 <garyo-home>	me too I hope
  44 17:06:45 <GregNoel>	1848?
  45 17:06:46 <bdbaddog>	me 3
  46 17:07:21 <stevenknight>	yeah, p3
  47 17:07:29 <bdbaddog>	I though 139 was the first bug to discuss ?
  48 17:07:50 <GregNoel>	No, the first few are from the issues list; no spreadsheet.
  49 17:08:08 <GregNoel>	Just the ones with priorities or votes.
  50 17:08:11 <stevenknight>	link's on the wiki page
  51 17:08:16 <bdbaddog>	ahh o.k. there now.
  52 17:08:35 <stevenknight>	damn, I wash my laptop had a bigger screen right now
  53 17:09:07 <GregNoel>	It seems to me that I've done what bug is about with no problems, but I looked for it and couldn't find it.
  54 17:09:42 <GregNoel>	I wish my second screen on my desktop was working...
  55 17:10:09 <stevenknight>	1848:  sort of nagging thing that shakes confidence when people hit it
  56 17:10:10 <garyo-home>	doesn't it cause a problem on linux because of no exe suffix?
  57 17:10:12 <bdbaddog>	anyone had time to try and reproduce 1848?
  58 17:10:17 <stevenknight>	yes re: no .exe suffix
  59 17:10:26 <garyo-home>	seems to me like a usual case of alias/filename conflict.
  60 17:10:26 <stevenknight>	yes, someone should check reproducibility
  61 17:10:40 <stevenknight>	if it's reproducible, what timeframe?
  62 17:10:48 <stevenknight>	1.x?
  63 17:10:59 <GregNoel>	OK, or 2.x
  64 17:11:18 <garyo-home>	2.x unless the error is really gross.
  65 17:11:34 <bdbaddog>	2.x
  66 17:11:40 <stevenknight>	i can go with 2.x
  67 17:11:40 <stevenknight>	done
  68 17:11:41 <garyo-home>	how about 1966?
  69 17:12:34 <stevenknight>	i hate wading into the configure code
  70 17:12:35 <bdbaddog>	looks like 2 issues, doc plus functional ?
  71 17:12:38 <stevenknight>	yeah
  72 17:12:48 <bdbaddog>	maybe fix docs in 1.x, fix issue in 2.x ?
  73 17:13:06 <GregNoel>	good for me
  74 17:13:16 <stevenknight>	+1
  75 17:13:19 <bdbaddog>	should we split bug into two bugs then?
  76 17:13:27 <stevenknight>	+1
  77 17:13:35 <GregNoel>	Bill, will you do it?
  78 17:13:46 <bdbaddog>	yes.
  79 17:13:52 <GregNoel>	Next?
  80 17:14:17 <garyo-home>	1969, looks like
  81 17:14:25 <stevenknight>	1969:  ugly problem
  82 17:14:26 <garyo-home>	i18n
  83 17:14:35 <stevenknight>	tip of the i18n iceberg
  84 17:14:40 <GregNoel>	Needs features not in 1.5.2; should be 2.x
  85 17:14:50 <bdbaddog>	2.x
  86 17:14:52 <garyo-home>	(at least default tool setup *can* now be disabled, but that's not a good answer)
  87 17:14:54 <garyo-home>	2.x
  88 17:15:11 <stevenknight>	sure, 2.x
  89 17:15:13 <GregNoel>	next?
  90 17:15:20 <stevenknight>	re; 1969 though
  91 17:15:32 <stevenknight>	no, wait, i'll update it myself
  92 17:15:41 <stevenknight>	he obviously didn't know you can disable the tool selection
  93 17:16:05 <garyo-home>	personal business, brb sorry
  94 17:16:07 <garyo-home>	keep going
  95 17:16:30 <stevenknight>	1217
  96 17:16:36 <stevenknight>	(how far are we going on this list, BTW?)
  97 17:16:41 <bdbaddog>	1217. anyone know the cache management stuff?
  98 17:16:58 <bdbaddog>	I think Greg said "aim for 2002 bugs, hope for 2003" to be handled.
  99 17:16:59 <stevenknight>	that'd b e me
 100 17:17:16 <stevenknight>	this needs a design for a mechanism, not a quick fix
 101 17:17:16 <bdbaddog>	this is not minor stuff is it?
 102 17:17:18 <stevenknight>	2.x
 103 17:17:21 <bdbaddog>	2.x
 104 17:17:24 <GregNoel>	ok
 105 17:17:51 <GregNoel>	235 is in our 2002 list; I propose we deal with it there.
 106 17:18:00 <bdbaddog>	ok
 107 17:18:04 <stevenknight>	ok
 108 17:18:17 <bdbaddog>	1959 then?
 109 17:18:57 <stevenknight>	i think 1.x, should be an easy fix, and it looks dumb if it doesn't work
 110 17:19:03 *	GregNoel stays silent, although 1959 was a very good year
 111 17:19:35 <bdbaddog>	1.x unless its messy. would be my vote. :)
 112 17:19:54 <stevenknight>	1.x then -- can always be pushed out if it gets bad
 113 17:20:12 <GregNoel>	on to 2002 then?
 114 17:20:17 <bdbaddog>	yup.
 115 17:21:03 <bdbaddog>	139 - research
 116 17:21:14 <stevenknight>	research
 117 17:21:39 <GregNoel>	I think we should close it until there's a need
 118 17:22:03 <stevenknight>	hmm, now that you mention it, I'm okay with that
 119 17:22:15 <GregNoel>	wontfix?
 120 17:22:31 <bdbaddog>	if we close, will we loose a placeholder for the idea?
 121 17:22:49 <stevenknight>	sure -- I'd love to do better than ClearCase, but if there's no compelling user demand, that's just my ego at work
 122 17:23:08 <GregNoel>	{;-}
 123 17:23:34 <GregNoel>	consensus?
 124 17:23:41 <stevenknight>	bill, close it?
 125 17:23:52 <bdbaddog>	I guess the issue is is the bugtracker a good place to placehold ideas or should we move to a wiki page?
 126 17:24:07 *	stevenknight has quit ("This computer has gone to sleep")
 127 17:24:15 <garyo-home>	if it's just an idea, make it future
 128 17:24:21 <GregNoel>	future p5 then, the "will get to never" stack
 129 17:24:32 <bdbaddog>	o.k. that's fine with me.
 130 17:24:48 <garyo-home>	ok, I'm sort of here now
 131 17:24:51 <garyo-home>	148?
 132 17:25:19 <GregNoel>	assign to Brandon for research
 133 17:25:31 <bdbaddog>	sounds good to me.
 134 17:25:36 <garyo-home>	ok
 135 17:25:46 <GregNoel>	done
 136 17:25:49 <garyo-home>	then on to 177
 137 17:26:16 <garyo-home>	already mostly works like he says
 138 17:26:30 <bdbaddog>	future.  I think was the concensus
 139 17:26:34 <GregNoel>	yup
 140 17:26:38 <garyo-home>	ok by me.
 141 17:26:45 <garyo-home>	or close it.
 142 17:27:06 <garyo-home>	193 = gsoc?
 143 17:27:08 <GregNoel>	193, we have a viable proposal;
 144 17:27:20 <bdbaddog>	+1
 145 17:27:36 <GregNoel>	bypass until next time?
 146 17:27:54 <garyo-home>	or assume gsoc will get integrated in the 2.x timeframe and assign to that.
 147 17:27:56 <bdbaddog>	or after projects are accepted?
 148 17:28:06 *	stevenknight1 (n=stevenkn@69.36.227.131) has joined #scons
 149 17:28:07 <garyo-home>	anyway, make a note in the bug
 150 17:28:28 <stevenknight1>	i'm back, had to run get the shuttle
 151 17:28:35 <garyo-home>	194? I say wontfix
 152 17:28:37 <Pankrat>	assign bug to soc student?
 153 17:28:48 <bdbaddog>	194 wontfix.
 154 17:28:48 <stevenknight1>	what was the consensus about where to record long-term ideas?  issues or wiki?
 155 17:28:57 <garyo-home>	future, p5
 156 17:28:57 <bdbaddog>	issues as future
 157 17:29:11 <stevenknight1>	okay
 158 17:29:12 <stevenknight1>	194 wontfis
 159 17:29:15 <stevenknight1>	wontfix
 160 17:29:28 <GregNoel>	Pankrat, yes; you'll get some too.
 161 17:29:47 <Pankrat>	:)
 162 17:29:52 <garyo-home>	great. 219?  can o' worms.
 163 17:30:12 <stevenknight1>	yeah
 164 17:30:30 <bdbaddog>	what's the benefit of being able to do this?
 165 17:30:55 <GregNoel>	Virtual current working directory, names are more convenient.
 166 17:31:34 <garyo-home>	kind of like a mini-SConscript?
 167 17:31:51 <GregNoel>	Um, close enough.
 168 17:31:52 <stevenknight1>	how about wontfix, and if someone really wants it they can contribute code
 169 17:31:58 <garyo-home>	+1
 170 17:32:01 <stevenknight1>	no one seems to be beating down the doors for it
 171 17:32:01 <bdbaddog>	+1
 172 17:32:05 <GregNoel>	ok
 173 17:32:15 <GregNoel>	next?
 174 17:32:26 <garyo-home>	232: reasearch, then if it's true, it's an easy fix
 175 17:32:37 <stevenknight1>	???  I don't think it is
 176 17:32:46 <GregNoel>	assign to whom?
 177 17:32:52 <bdbaddog>	this is when a user has same header file name in more than one dir.
 178 17:32:54 <bdbaddog>	right?
 179 17:32:55 <stevenknight1>	it's replicating a quirky behavior in MSVC's preprocessor
 180 17:33:04 <garyo-home>	steven: I don't think it's true either, never heard of that behavior
 181 17:33:10 <garyo-home>	but can't prove it.
 182 17:33:21 <stevenknight1>	ah, if that's the case, then it *is* easy:  INVALID
 183 17:33:22 <GregNoel>	research?
 184 17:33:37 <stevenknight1>	or just close it, it's old and no one else has complained
 185 17:33:40 <bdbaddog>	invalid. 1 guy reported it 6 years ago.
 186 17:33:48 <bdbaddog>	and never complained again?
 187 17:33:49 <garyo-home>	i think so too.
 188 17:33:51 <GregNoel>	ok, invalid
 189 17:34:13 <garyo-home>	243?
 190 17:34:20 <Pankrat>	235 got lost?
 191 17:34:21 <stevenknight1>	not 235?
 192 17:34:35 <garyo-home>	ok, 235
 193 17:34:37 <stevenknight1>	235:  research
 194 17:34:44 <bdbaddog>	research.
 195 17:34:56 <Pankrat>	I have a counter example, but could not post it
 196 17:35:09 <Pankrat>	(I've sent it to Greg)
 197 17:35:10 <garyo-home>	pankrat: that's exactly what's needed.
 198 17:35:14 <GregNoel>	research and report
 199 17:35:14 <stevenknight1>	excellent
 200 17:35:47 <GregNoel>	I'll add it to the bug; who should research?  I can take a look.
 201 17:35:48 <stevenknight1>	Pankrat:  you couldn't add it to the issue?
 202 17:36:05 <Pankrat>	yes tigris complained
 203 17:36:10 <GregNoel>	Before you were here, he reported a problem, maybe with his browser.
 204 17:36:16 <stevenknight1>	do we need to change your project role?
 205 17:36:19 <stevenknight1>	ah
 206 17:36:39 <GregNoel>	I thought anyone could comment?
 207 17:36:41 <stevenknight1>	okay, GregNoel update and research?
 208 17:36:47 <GregNoel>	works.
 209 17:36:54 <garyo-home>	good; now 243?
 210 17:37:10 <garyo-home>	Greg, you said Ignores would handle this?
 211 17:37:13 <stevenknight1>	243:  1.x if it's really doc
 212 17:37:31 <GregNoel>	1.0 if it's really doc
 213 17:37:36 <bdbaddog>	+1
 214 17:37:40 <stevenknight1>	+1
 215 17:37:41 <bdbaddog>	someone research it?
 216 17:37:43 <garyo-home>	so that means research, then assign?
 217 17:37:52 <bdbaddog>	I'll research it.
 218 17:38:27 <GregNoel>	(Maciej uses it for his stuff; it's known to work; I'll get you a ref.)
 219 17:38:39 <GregNoel>	next?
 220 17:38:43 <stevenknight1>	oh, good
 221 17:38:50 <bdbaddog>	317
 222 17:38:53 <stevenknight1>	317:  wontfix
 223 17:39:10 <GregNoel>	+1
 224 17:39:11 <stevenknight1>	actully, we should then make -d one of the "ignored for compatibility" options that show up at the top of the help
 225 17:39:19 <stevenknight1>	i'll take it
 226 17:39:24 <GregNoel>	ok
 227 17:39:26 <garyo-home>	ok
 228 17:39:35 <GregNoel>	1.0 then?
 229 17:39:50 <garyo-home>	same w/ 323 I hope?
 230 17:39:51 <stevenknight1>	yeah, it's not destabilizing
 231 17:40:10 <GregNoel>	next?
 232 17:40:11 <stevenknight1>	yes re: 323, i'll take that too
 233 17:40:35 <bdbaddog>	324 2.x
 234 17:40:39 <stevenknight1>	2.x
 235 17:40:45 <garyo-home>	ok
 236 17:40:47 <GregNoel>	I'll take it
 237 17:41:11 <garyo-home>	325 is hard I think
 238 17:41:29 <stevenknight1>	might be, but i think it might be easy with overriding an individual Node's Decider() function
 239 17:41:44 <stevenknight1>	that's not supported by an API right now, but it's architecturally possible
 240 17:41:50 <GregNoel>	Or just a flag to ignore all dependencies
 241 17:41:58 <garyo-home>	future?
 242 17:42:00 <stevenknight1>	future
 243 17:42:02 <bdbaddog>	future
 244 17:42:04 <GregNoel>	ok
 245 17:42:06 <garyo-home>	Is anyone really wanting it?
 246 17:42:09 <stevenknight1>	no one's asking for it
 247 17:42:10 <GregNoel>	what priority?
 248 17:42:19 <stevenknight1>	p4?
 249 17:42:19 <GregNoel>	p3 then
 250 17:42:21 <garyo-home>	p3, average
 251 17:42:25 <stevenknight1>	p3
 252 17:42:45 <garyo-home>	I'd like 326 (-p, env.Dump())
 253 17:42:58 <GregNoel>	ok, 1.x?
 254 17:43:05 <GregNoel>	or 1.0?
 255 17:43:05 <garyo-home>	OK, give it to me.
 256 17:43:08 <garyo-home>	1.x
 257 17:43:10 <stevenknight1>	1.x
 258 17:43:13 <garyo-home>	it's a new feature, not 1.0.
 259 17:43:18 <GregNoel>	ok
 260 17:43:48 <stevenknight1>	327:  2.x, and i'll take it
 261 17:43:55 <GregNoel>	ok
 262 17:43:59 <stevenknight1>	unless someone else really wants in on environment stuff...
 263 17:44:06 <bdbaddog>	hey. I've gotta leave now. my comments are in the spreadsheets.
 264 17:44:16 <stevenknight1>	okay, thanks
 265 17:44:19 <GregNoel>	enjoy the sweat
 266 17:44:36 <bdbaddog>	if you have any questions about my comments which are worth waiting for shoot me an email.. otherwise enjoy the party..
 267 17:44:39 <garyo-home>	329: what is -w?
 268 17:45:16 <stevenknight1>	make -w tells it to print the "Entering/Exiting directory" messages
 269 17:45:28 <GregNoel>	not needed
 270 17:45:32 <stevenknight1>	the only time we do that is if they specify -C on the command line
 271 17:45:43 <stevenknight1>	give it to me, i'll move it to "ignored for compatibility" with the others
 272 17:45:49 <GregNoel>	ok
 273 17:46:35 <stevenknight1>	322:  consensus seems good, 1.x and Jim Randall
 274 17:46:42 <jrandall>	aye
 275 17:46:42 <GregNoel>	yes
 276 17:46:50 <stevenknight1>	332 i meant
 277 17:46:54 <GregNoel>	Hi, Jim
 278 17:47:05 <jrandall>	hello!
 279 17:47:11 <stevenknight1>	hey jim
 280 17:47:17 <GregNoel>	that was quick; next?
 281 17:47:21 <stevenknight1>	336:  wontfix...
 282 17:47:33 <GregNoel>	yes
 283 17:47:43 <stevenknight1>	341:  wontfix...
 284 17:47:48 <stevenknight1>	(hey, we're on a roll here...)
 285 17:48:19 <GregNoel>	wontfix, aye
 286 17:48:28 <stevenknight1>	342:  fixed
 287 17:48:32 <GregNoel>	the spreadsheet helps...
 288 17:48:38 <GregNoel>	yes
 289 17:48:53 <stevenknight1>	yeah
 290 17:49:11 <stevenknight1>	343:  future, at a minimum
 291 17:49:15 <GregNoel>	343, RANLIB
 292 17:49:31 <stevenknight1>	i don't think it's really just RANLIB
 293 17:49:39 <GregNoel>	Question: does SCons automatically apply RANLIB for those platforms that need it?  Or does the user have to code something?
 294 17:50:44 <stevenknight1>	hang on, let me check
 295 17:51:14 <stevenknight1>	we just set it up in the Tool/ar.py module
 296 17:51:38 <GregNoel>	It needs to be applied; that's 1.x
 297 17:51:42 <stevenknight1>	and only if we detect 'ranlib' installed independent from 'ar'
 298 17:51:57 <stevenknight1>	okay, so there are two parts to the issue here
 299 17:52:13 <stevenknight1>	make RANLIB independent from ar:  1.x
 300 17:52:21 <stevenknight1>	GCCTOOLCHAIN stuff:  future
 301 17:52:23 <stevenknight1>	???
 302 17:52:26 <GregNoel>	+1
 303 17:53:04 <GregNoel>	Or just drop the GCC alternate toolchain stuff; no user need
 304 17:53:24 <stevenknight1>	okay, i can live with that
 305 17:53:46 <stevenknight1>	i can take RANLIB, I guess
 306 17:53:54 <GregNoel>	I'll mark it up.
 307 17:54:01 <GregNoel>	next?
 308 17:54:26 <stevenknight1>	344:  1.x, mine
 309 17:54:33 <GregNoel>	What priority?
 310 17:54:55 <stevenknight1>	p2, i think
 311 17:54:59 <GregNoel>	done
 312 17:55:23 <stevenknight1>	347:  wontfix
 313 17:55:24 <GregNoel>	347, 349, close
 314 17:55:30 <stevenknight1>	yes, yes
 315 17:55:45 <stevenknight1>	353 close
 316 17:56:18 <GregNoel>	yes, no ego permitted {;-}
 317 17:56:26 <stevenknight1>	:-)
 318 17:56:31 <stevenknight1>	356:  wontfix
 319 17:56:40 <GregNoel>	yes
 320 17:56:44 <stevenknight1>	374:  wontfix
 321 17:56:58 <GregNoel>	yes
 322 17:57:10 <stevenknight1>	and that's all for 2002...
 323 17:57:23 <GregNoel>	next 2003
 324 17:57:29 <GregNoel>	397?
 325 17:57:37 <garyo-home>	wow, i step out of the room and you're on to 2003 already!
 326 17:57:47 <GregNoel>	got to be quick
 327 17:58:08 <stevenknight1>	i didn't pre-scan these...
 328 17:58:13 <garyo-home>	nor me, sorry
 329 17:58:24 <GregNoel>	homework...
 330 17:58:30 <stevenknight1>	greg, is the issue link you sent sorted in this order?
 331 17:58:47 <GregNoel>	uh, not quite, but close enough
 332 17:58:52 <GregNoel>	two issues are out of order
 333 17:58:58 <garyo-home>	397 looks like future to me
 334 17:59:08 <garyo-home>	or wontfix
 335 17:59:10 <GregNoel>	I accidently sorted them by issue id
 336 17:59:22 <Pankrat>	397 wontfix: I prefer repos as they are
 337 17:59:31 <Pankrat>	justme
 338 17:59:56 <garyo-home>	402 then?
 339 18:00:12 <garyo-home>	we should do something about this one, it's bit me.
 340 18:00:15 <garyo-home>	:-)
 341 18:00:16 <stevenknight1>	397:  wontfix
 342 18:00:42 <stevenknight1>	402:  give it to me, I'm revamping the Windows toolchain support
 343 18:00:49 <stevenknight1>	2.x
 344 18:00:54 <stevenknight1>	p2
 345 18:00:55 <garyo-home>	agree
 346 18:00:55 <GregNoel>	done
 347 18:01:19 <garyo-home>	409: irix is dead, i say wontfix.
 348 18:01:26 <stevenknight1>	409:  wontfix
 349 18:01:29 <GregNoel>	yes
 350 18:01:31 <garyo-home>	Besides, parallel builds on IRIX have never really worked right.
 351 18:02:16 <stevenknight1>	416:  i say wontfix
 352 18:02:31 <garyo-home>	it's interesting though
 353 18:02:38 <garyo-home>	future?
 354 18:02:38 <GregNoel>	Interesting, yes
 355 18:02:44 <stevenknight1>	strikes me as the sort of nice-sounding idea that probably has lots of unintended side effects due to statefulness
 356 18:03:02 <stevenknight1>	i can live with future
 357 18:03:15 <GregNoel>	There's an associated bug report with a model for doing it
 358 18:03:28 <GregNoel>	but it is intended for advanced users
 359 18:03:39 <GregNoel>	future is fine
 360 18:03:40 <garyo-home>	greg: where?
 361 18:03:44 <garyo-home>	ok, future
 362 18:03:46 <stevenknight1>	which bug report?  am i missing a link?
 363 18:04:07 <GregNoel>	Isn't there one at the bottom of the bug?
 364 18:04:31 <garyo-home>	sorry, that.  Yes, that's what's interesting.
 365 18:05:12 <stevenknight1>	bottom of 416?
 366 18:05:16 <GregNoel>	Oops, no link.  wait.
 367 18:06:45 <garyo-home>	anyway, it's going to end up future.  How about 433?
 368 18:06:50 <GregNoel>	1933
 369 18:07:09 <garyo-home>	huh?
 370 18:07:20 <stevenknight1>	1933 is the associated bug report to 416
 371 18:07:24 <GregNoel>	oops 1939
 372 18:07:30 <GregNoel>	yes
 373 18:07:42 <GregNoel>	"fast unsafe"
 374 18:08:24 <stevenknight1>	wow, hadn't really looked at that one
 375 18:08:43 <stevenknight1>	lots of evil statefulness...
 376 18:09:00 <garyo-home>	I really don't like that one (not that I understand it fully)
 377 18:09:06 <stevenknight1>	wait, not really, i misunderstood
 378 18:09:13 <garyo-home>	but it looks dangerous at best
 379 18:09:26 <stevenknight1>	doesn't strike me as related to 416, though
 380 18:09:31 <GregNoel>	advanced users, for sure, lots of warnings, but it would be fast.
 381 18:09:41 <stevenknight1>	the way i read it, 416 is "remember where I died, start there nxt time"
 382 18:10:15 <GregNoel>	But what they really all ask for is quick reaction to local SConscript.
 383 18:10:31 <stevenknight1>	but 416 is transparent to the user, 1939 requires SConscript changes
 384 18:10:42 <GregNoel>	or a command-line option.
 385 18:10:46 <garyo-home>	1939 to me: future unless someone shows us some code
 386 18:10:52 <Pankrat>	well interactive solves this too
 387 18:10:53 <stevenknight1>	agree w/gary
 388 18:11:06 <garyo-home>	yes Pankrat
 389 18:11:17 <GregNoel>	somebody twisted my arm to put it in GSoC, so I did
 390 18:11:25 <stevenknight1>	i also think we can do what 1939 is asking now that the Big Signature Refactoring has changed the .sconsign format
 391 18:11:30 <stevenknight1>	that's one of its intended goals
 392 18:11:39 <stevenknight1>	...and I guess that means I just signed up for 1939... :-)
 393 18:11:54 <garyo-home>	ok, but still future?
 394 18:11:59 <stevenknight1>	yeah, future
 395 18:12:03 <GregNoel>	p2?
 396 18:12:06 <garyo-home>	ok
 397 18:12:09 <GregNoel>	done
 398 18:12:12 <stevenknight1>	sure, p2
 399 18:12:18 <GregNoel>	same for 433?
 400 18:12:20 <garyo-home>	so how bout 433 I think is next
 401 18:12:39 <stevenknight1>	did we finish 416 before that digression?  future?
 402 18:12:52 <garyo-home>	433: I'm not an automake guy so those things look really specialized to me, I'd never use them.
 403 18:12:56 <GregNoel>	oops, same for 416 then?
 404 18:13:10 <stevenknight1>	416:  future
 405 18:13:12 <garyo-home>	I'm ok w/ 416 -> future
 406 18:13:16 <GregNoel>	p2?
 407 18:13:18 <stevenknight1>	433:  2.x, me
 408 18:13:24 <stevenknight1>	?
 409 18:13:38 <garyo-home>	do people really want 433?
 410 18:13:39 <GregNoel>	433 p2?
 411 18:13:49 <stevenknight1>	not sure
 412 18:13:53 <garyo-home>	Can't it just be aliases etc.?
 413 18:14:06 <GregNoel>	no, it's more complex.
 414 18:14:07 <stevenknight1>	but i think i'll need to take a look at that as part of integrating Maciej's automake stuff
 415 18:14:26 <garyo-home>	ok, i see
 416 18:14:29 <stevenknight1>	it should all be part of finishing and documenting that so it works "naturally" for people migrating from autotools
 417 18:14:38 <GregNoel>	exactly
 418 18:14:38 <stevenknight1>	yes?
 419 18:14:51 <stevenknight1>	433:  2.x, me, p2
 420 18:14:54 <GregNoel>	dpme
 421 18:14:56 <garyo-home>	ok
 422 18:14:59 <GregNoel>	oops, done
 423 18:15:22 <garyo-home>	438: i like that one, just ignore the .sconsign.
 424 18:15:41 <stevenknight1>	yeah, that would be handy
 425 18:15:43 <garyo-home>	i say 2.x, p2
 426 18:15:55 <stevenknight1>	i think there's a make option that does something similar...?
 427 18:15:55 <garyo-home>	or maybe even 1.x
 428 18:16:04 <GregNoel>	Ah, it's a dup with 331
 429 18:16:34 <stevenknight1>	okay
 430 18:17:03 <garyo-home>	not exactly a dup though.
 431 18:17:19 <garyo-home>	331 is "what if", 438 says actually redo everything.
 432 18:17:22 <stevenknight1>	oh, right:  331 is like -n, 438 really wants the build to happen
 433 18:17:24 <stevenknight1>	right
 434 18:17:42 <garyo-home>	331 is harder due to signatures and generated code.
 435 18:17:50 <GregNoel>	No, -W does not add -n
 436 18:18:14 <stevenknight1>	no, but it doesn't actually do the build, does it?
 437 18:18:19 <GregNoel>	If you say -W, the file is rebuilt; if you add -n it will tell you what else is rebuilt
 438 18:18:29 *	ita has quit (Remote closed the connection)
 439 18:18:33 <stevenknight1>	oh, wow, I didn't know that
 440 18:18:49 <stevenknight1>	hey, i didn't notice that ita was here...!
 441 18:18:56 <stevenknight1>	you guys know who that was IRL?
 442 18:18:58 <stevenknight1>	is?
 443 18:19:04 <garyo-home>	no, who?
 444 18:19:10 <stevenknight1>	our good friend Thomas Nagy
 445 18:19:14 <garyo-home>	ah.
 446 18:19:19 <stevenknight1>	cool
 447 18:19:40 <garyo-home>	... so 331 should get a note explaining what Greg said
 448 18:19:47 <stevenknight1>	agreed
 449 18:20:26 <GregNoel>	So close this as a dup?
 450 18:20:51 <garyo-home>	i just put the note in 331 but I say link them, don't close either as dup
 451 18:21:09 <stevenknight1>	guess so, if it really does behave like make -W
 452 18:21:46 <GregNoel>	I'll dig out the exact man page section from make and add it
 453 18:21:46 <garyo-home>	ok, if they're the same then fine
 454 18:21:51 <garyo-home>	good.
 455 18:22:04 <GregNoel>	447?
 456 18:22:08 <stevenknight1>	447:  i say wontfix
 457 18:22:13 <garyo-home>	wontfix
 458 18:22:15 <stevenknight1>	way too complicated and specialized
 459 18:22:24 <GregNoel>	wontfix
 460 18:22:35 <GregNoel>	and Bill says wontfix
 461 18:22:43 <stevenknight1>	448:  wontfix
 462 18:22:44 <Pankrat>	if you ignore the text and only read the summary than it makes a little sense
 463 18:22:48 <Pankrat>	(447)
 464 18:23:05 <Pankrat>	but I have no good idea to implement it :(
 465 18:23:38 <stevenknight1>	agreed, it's not obvious how to do it
 466 18:23:50 <GregNoel>	Bill and I say wontfix, 448
 467 18:23:55 <stevenknight1>	448:  wontfix
 468 18:23:58 <garyo-home>	448: wontfix
 469 18:23:59 <GregNoel>	done
 470 18:24:26 <garyo-home>	449 can usually be done by massaging the action list.
 471 18:24:36 <stevenknight1>	of the Builder?
 472 18:24:44 <garyo-home>	yes
 473 18:24:50 <GregNoel>	API?
 474 18:24:53 <garyo-home>	That's how I do 'mt' on Windows now
 475 18:25:12 <stevenknight1>	i see
 476 18:25:16 <garyo-home>	I wouldn't mind AppendAction/PrependAction though
 477 18:25:28 <garyo-home>	(just thinking out loud)
 478 18:25:39 <stevenknight1>	actually, related but OT:  how about adding pre_action= and post_action= keyword arguments to Builder calls, too
 479 18:25:59 <GregNoel>	Overkill?
 480 18:26:04 <garyo-home>	how's that better than a separate call?
 481 18:26:14 <GregNoel>	This isn't Perl
 482 18:26:17 <stevenknight1>	you may not want to modify the actual Builder itself
 483 18:26:37 <garyo-home>	If you're not modifying the builder, then pre_action === AddPreAction, right?
 484 18:26:41 <stevenknight1>	or the builder's action list
 485 18:26:51 <stevenknight1>	yes
 486 18:27:10 <stevenknight1>	but you wouldn't have to capture the return and call it separately
 487 18:27:21 <stevenknight1>	maybe that's just syntactic sugar and we don't need the extra complexity
 488 18:27:39 <garyo-home>	I think that's right
 489 18:27:49 <stevenknight1>	okay, move on
 490 18:28:20 <GregNoel>	460, src_dir
 491 18:28:20 <garyo-home>	so 449 is wontfix then?
 492 18:28:38 <stevenknight1>	whoops, we're coming to my stop in a minute or two
 493 18:29:07 <stevenknight1>	i'm going to send something to the mailing list about branching
 494 18:29:32 <GregNoel>	run for home; will you be back?
 495 18:29:36 <stevenknight1>	i need a place for some stuff I have to work on for 2.x
 496 18:29:42 <stevenknight1>	it's about a 15 min. walk
 497 18:30:06 <GregNoel>	Without Bill and you, we should probably break here, then
 498 18:30:14 <stevenknight1>	okay, gotta go
 499 18:30:20 <stevenknight1>	catch you on the mailing list
 500 18:30:22 *	stevenknight1 has quit ("Leaving")
 501 18:30:31 <garyo-home>	so who'
 502 18:30:34 <garyo-home>	s left?
 503 18:30:49 <Pankrat>	I am. But I go to sleep now ...
 504 18:30:56 <GregNoel>	you and me, Ken never showed
 505 18:31:00 <garyo-home>	ok, let's just do 460 and break then.
 506 18:31:05 <GregNoel>	ok
 507 18:31:15 <garyo-home>	I think 460 just wants a better error message really.
 508 18:31:16 <GregNoel>	I'm of the opinion that src_dir should be removed until we know what it's supposed to do.
 509 18:31:31 <garyo-home>	:-/
 510 18:32:03 <GregNoel>	Every time I've tried it, it hasn't worked, or it's done something I didn't expect.
 511 18:32:21 <GregNoel>	I don't think even a better error message can save it
 512 18:32:25 <garyo-home>	how about we make it 1.x but only add the error message to detect this case, then file a new bug for "remove src_dir unless someone can explain it"
 513 18:32:40 <GregNoel>	I'll buy that
 514 18:32:41 <garyo-home>	(this case being: src_dir without build_dir)
 515 18:32:52 <GregNoel>	yes.
 516 18:33:07 <GregNoel>	OK, I'll put that in the bug
 517 18:33:31 <garyo-home>	ok then, we'll pick up where we left off next time.  Thanks!  Greg, are you going to do all the data entry?
 518 18:33:32 <GregNoel>	Since you were host, you're done; I'll take care of fixing all the bugs.
 519 18:33:54 <garyo-home>	sorry I didn't really host much.  I'm only about 50% present right now.
 520 18:34:00 <garyo-home>	exhausted.
 521 18:34:07 <GregNoel>	And I've got the IRC log; I can post that, too.
 522 18:34:13 <garyo-home>	ok, thx!
 523 18:34:19 <garyo-home>	bye then
 524 18:34:24 <GregNoel>	cul
 525 18:34:36 *	You have been marked as being away
 526 18:34:43 *	jrandall (n=jim@bas1-london14-1167886910.dsl.bell.ca) has left #scons
 527 18:35:37 *	Pankrat (n=ludwig@dslb-088-073-195-149.pools.arcor-ip.net) has left #scons
 528 18:35:40 *	garyo-home (n=chatzill@209-6-158-38.c3-0.smr-ubr3.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com) has left #scons
 529 

BugParty/IrcLog2008-04-01 (last edited 2008-04-02 22:47:30 by ip68-7-76-16)