Please note:The SCons wiki is now restored from the attack in March 2013. All old passwords have been invalidated. Please reset your password if you have an account. If you note missing pages, please report them to webmaster@scons.org. Also, new account creation is currently disabled due to an ongoing spam flood (2013/08/27).
   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)