18:53:02 * stevenknight (n=stevenkn@72.14.224.1) has joined #scons
19:01:03 stevenknight good evening, anyone else here for bugs?
19:01:08 GregNoel Warning: The Internet connection in this condo is in the middle of the living room, so rugrats are in play, Action Heros are on the TV, relatives and food are scattered all over, and multiple distractions are, er, distracting.
19:01:26 garyo-home Hi guys, I'm here.
19:01:44 GregNoel Are you there, Bill?
19:02:01 garyo-home Greg: welcome back!
19:02:26 GregNoel Well, I'm only sorta back, but I'll try to hang in there.
19:02:31 * garyo-home wonders if this is how you do the IRC italic thing
19:02:36 * garyo-home realizes it is.
19:03:10 GregNoel What italic thing?
19:03:28 stevenknight i bet garyo's IRC client display /me messages in italics...?
19:03:34 garyo-home yes.
19:03:41 GregNoel Ah.
19:04:01 garyo-home Seems to be how one writes about oneself in the third person.
19:04:18 * GregNoel is not so sure
19:04:18 garyo-home So, we're waiting for Bill?
19:04:31 stevenknight i'd say let's start and he can join
19:04:34 * garyo-home thinks that's funny
19:04:39 garyo-home ok
19:04:41 GregNoel ok
19:04:47 * stevenknight thinks we're all bozos on this bus
19:04:52 garyo-home We're starting with 2098 then?
19:05:05 garyo-home Or is it 2105?
19:05:19 GregNoel 2098 was only updated yesterday
19:05:32 GregNoel so I imagine we should start with 2105
19:05:30 garyo-home ok, 2105 then.
19:05:38 stevenknight 2105
19:06:00 GregNoel I am swayed by Gary's argument, but not convinced
19:06:03 garyo-home I"m ok with doc for 1.0, but I think it ought to be made to work someday.
19:06:23 GregNoel So maybe you should take it?
19:06:54 garyo-home OK, give it to me, I'll doc it for now and reassign as 1.x or 2.0 afterward.
19:06:59 GregNoel done
19:07:03 stevenknight done
19:07:31 garyo-home 2106: 1.0.x, p3, steven?
19:07:36 stevenknight works for me
19:07:44 GregNoel done
19:07:53 garyo-home 2107?
19:08:28 stevenknight 2107: agree w/Greg that we need a comprehensive solution
19:08:31 garyo-home I think Install as is should copy the source, but there should be a new way to do a real install.
19:08:41 stevenknight define "real install?"
19:08:53 GregNoel I don't know how to get there from here
19:08:54 stevenknight you mean like a package install?
19:09:00 garyo-home real = like the BSD install command that takes mode/owner/group.
19:09:08 stevenknight ah
19:09:20 stevenknight why not do that with additional args to the current Install()?
19:09:26 GregNoel Configure makes the same distinction
19:09:42 garyo-home Steven: I'd be OK w/ that.
19:10:07 stevenknight I think it's already confusing enough to a lot of people that our Install() is modeled after the BSD command
19:10:17 garyo-home Not sure if it's a + or - that those args could be set in the env though.
19:10:35 stevenknight instead of something that means "make this part of the installation items for this package" like you have in a RPM or Deb linux distribution
19:11:04 garyo-home Right; we should check Maciej's stuff, I'm pretty sure he solves this.
19:11:05 GregNoel Maybe we could split off InstallData/InstallExec?
19:11:21 stevenknight good point re: Maciej
19:11:26 garyo-home Greg: there should be a layer in between, but that's the right idea.
19:11:27 stevenknight and the need for Install{Data,Exec}
19:11:49 GregNoel Maciej added the install prefix but that would kill anyone who used it for a copy
19:12:03 stevenknight how about i take this one
19:12:14 GregNoel when?
19:12:18 garyo-home OK w/ me. Research or ???
19:12:23 stevenknight i've been pretty sure integrating Maciej's stuff would fall to me anyway
19:12:42 stevenknight 1.x at the earliest, but no later than 2.x i'd think
19:12:44 GregNoel 1.x p4?
19:12:49 garyo-home So 1.x p3/p4?
19:12:52 stevenknight yeah, that sounds about right
19:12:57 stevenknight 1.x p4
19:12:59 GregNoel done
19:13:12 garyo-home 2108: trivial
19:13:17 GregNoel and consensus
19:13:20 stevenknight yes
19:13:21 stevenknight done
19:13:29 garyo-home 2109, what is im_func?
19:13:49 GregNoel dunno
19:13:57 garyo-home Anyway looks like consensus is 1.0.x p2 Benoit?
19:14:00 stevenknight it's an attribute on one of the Python data structures that refers the actual code function object
19:14:18 GregNoel Ah, yes, a 2.5 feature
19:14:33 stevenknight trying to get the code function object (which has the compiled byte code) to calculate the signature is pretty involved
19:14:47 GregNoel so we need a backward-compatible shim?
19:14:59 garyo-home It looks like a string action though, in the bug report.
19:15:04 stevenknight you have to thread your way through different attributes depending on whether it's a function, or a callable object, and a couple of other non-obvious cases
19:15:22 GregNoel Benoit then
19:15:27 stevenknight i think it just needs a little triage to isolate the difference in the reporter's Python version
19:15:29 garyo-home ok w/ me
19:15:42 stevenknight yeah 1.0.x p2 Benoit
19:15:47 GregNoel done
19:16:05 GregNoel 2110
19:16:11 garyo-home 2110: consensus 1.x p3 steven, unless tricky?
19:16:11 stevenknight 1.x p3 me
19:16:17 GregNoel done
19:16:17 stevenknight yes
19:16:30 garyo-home 2111: dup of 2051
19:16:39 GregNoel ok
19:16:55 stevenknight done
19:17:16 garyo-home 2112: consensus?
19:17:23 GregNoel ok, who?
19:17:21 stevenknight 2112: how have we survived this long with a summary line that violates the spec?
19:17:37 GregNoel Short entries?
19:17:42 stevenknight must be
19:17:45 stevenknight i'll take it
19:17:54 GregNoel ok, done
19:17:57 garyo-home Steven, good question. Maybe someone's rpmbuild is less forgiving
19:18:38 garyo-home 2113: consensus 1.x p3? Could be earlier, it's likely to be easy
19:19:15 stevenknight 2113: how about 1.0.x p4 then?
19:19:23 garyo-home fine w /me.
19:19:41 GregNoel I'm easy
19:19:55 garyo-home OK, good progress!
19:19:58 stevenknight ok, done
19:20:09 stevenknight oh, wait -- who?
19:20:26 garyo-home I could do it if you want.
19:20:34 stevenknight works for me
19:20:52 garyo-home ok.
19:20:59 stevenknight on to 2007 q1?
19:21:14 garyo-home I'm ready, looks like it starts w/ 1525.
19:21:35 garyo-home ... which is clearly toolchain.
19:21:37 GregNoel still shuffling, not as easy as on my desktop
19:21:40 stevenknight 1525: consensus future+toolchain
19:21:45 stevenknight devil's advocate, though:
19:22:08 stevenknight it would actually be pretty trivial to just add some variables for these instead of hard-coding them in Platform/__init__.py
19:22:28 stevenknight if the toolchain refactoring is going to take a while, is it worth doing something like that to help people in the meantime?
19:22:46 garyo-home Yes, that's actually how I got interested in that.
19:22:48 stevenknight or does that run the risk of boxing us into Yet Another feature that we'll have to maintain backwards compatibility for?
19:22:58 GregNoel hard choice
19:22:59 garyo-home Started looking at how to expose those vars.
19:23:38 garyo-home But you're right, given actual hours to be spent, toolchain refactor is going to take a while.
19:23:43 GregNoel I'd prefer to know where we're going before making short-term mods
19:24:17 garyo-home Greg: that's true for sure. But how long will even the design part take?
19:24:42 garyo-home I think once 1.0 is out we should spend some serious time on it. Not that I have any :-)
19:24:50 stevenknight okay, so for this bug, let's leave it future+toolchain
19:24:51 GregNoel I've got a few updates at home, but design is always a long process
19:25:10 GregNoel OK, and if we can factor some out short-term, we'll do it.
19:25:19 stevenknight with a notation to the effect that one early subtask in that should be nailing down the configurability interface
19:25:28 stevenknight (i.e. variable names)
19:25:37 GregNoel (Actually, toolchain has been 2.x p4 I think.)
19:25:43 stevenknight and retrofit that part to the existing code base if practical
19:25:43 garyo-home Right, or maybe a simple functional interface, whatever.
19:25:52 garyo-home yes.
19:25:53 GregNoel works for me
19:25:56 stevenknight done
19:26:30 stevenknight 1538: fixed by Gary?
19:26:34 garyo-home yes.
19:26:39 stevenknight done
19:26:57 GregNoel Any patch for 1546?
19:27:01 garyo-home 1546, Ada?
19:27:47 garyo-home No idea, let's mark it 2.x until other Ada requests come in or people vote for it.
19:27:54 stevenknight ++
19:28:00 GregNoel ++
19:28:10 GregNoel p3?
19:28:19 garyo-home Sure.
19:28:29 GregNoel done
19:28:38 garyo-home 1553: consensus=worksforme
19:28:43 stevenknight done
19:28:58 stevenknight 1558: ???
19:29:21 garyo-home Would be cool, but does anyone understand pdb?
19:29:25 GregNoel Not me
19:29:34 stevenknight just a smidge
19:29:50 stevenknight only enough to put in place what we currently have
19:29:58 garyo-home I think maybe 1.x or 2.0 p4.
19:30:02 stevenknight ...and look at how well *that's* turned out... :-)
19:30:05 garyo-home :-)
19:30:27 garyo-home Better debugging in general would be nice
19:30:34 GregNoel agreed
19:30:42 stevenknight how about p3? i'm swayed by your argument in the spreadsheet about making it easier to hack scons
19:31:09 garyo-home Well, I'd use it if it were there, for sure.
19:31:20 garyo-home So p3 is OK w/ me.
19:31:20 GregNoel 2.x p3, then?
19:31:43 stevenknight 1.x p3, i'd rather at least consider it sooner rather than later?
19:31:52 garyo-home OK. If anyone with pdb knowledge turns up, we ask them to work on it.
19:31:55 GregNoel Hmmmm... 1.x p4.
19:32:04 stevenknight i can go with that
19:32:06 garyo-home ok compromise.
19:32:09 GregNoel done
19:32:11 stevenknight done
19:32:32 GregNoel How's Nathan?
19:32:39 stevenknight 1567: awol, and i haven't followed up
19:32:58 garyo-home 1567: no sooner than 2.x unless Nathan is found.
19:33:10 GregNoel agreed
19:33:19 stevenknight 2.x, p...3?
19:33:25 GregNoel yes
19:33:28 garyo-home And besides it'd have to be customized for each distro, yuck.
19:33:35 garyo-home 2.x p3 ok.
19:33:40 stevenknight done
19:33:40 GregNoel but we need to mark it somehow so that
19:33:56 GregNoel we can find it again if Nathan shows
19:34:18 garyo-home hmm, gsoc keyword?
19:34:31 GregNoel ok, would work
19:35:19 garyo-home Not sure what we can do about 1570; no testcase.
19:35:29 stevenknight i'm okay with closing it out
19:35:52 stevenknight if it's important enough someone else will open up another issue with a testcase
19:35:54 garyo-home agree.
19:36:02 GregNoel concur
19:36:23 stevenknight 1571: consensus 2.x p3
19:36:23 stevenknight who?
19:36:40 stevenknight or we don't need to assign 2.x -- i keep forgetting
19:36:48 garyo-home Let's not.
19:36:53 GregNoel noone for now
19:37:02 stevenknight done
19:37:13 stevenknight 1574: research, VisualStudio, me
19:37:18 GregNoel done
19:37:31 stevenknight 1575: 1.x p3 jim
19:37:43 garyo-home ok
19:37:50 GregNoel done
19:38:23 garyo-home 1577: Greg, are you sure about .sconsign and test output?
19:38:26 * GregNoel has a rugrat on his head and other minor distractions....
19:38:43 stevenknight i hear rugrats are good eatin'
19:39:13 garyo-home it's quiet here on the right coast
19:39:46 stevenknight 1577: the Configure stuff has to store the result somewhere
19:39:54 GregNoel Ok, where in the .sconsign is it kept?
19:39:58 stevenknight when you re-run it will tell you things like "... yes (cached)"
19:40:26 stevenknight i'm not sure off the top of my head, that code makes my head hurt when I look at it
19:40:28 garyo-home I don't understand how it works, but I have tests that say .... "v1.03" (cached)
19:40:39 garyo-home where that v1.03 was output from a config-compiled binary.
19:40:57 GregNoel It seems to cache positive/negative results, but it doesn't capture command output, for example
19:41:52 * GregNoel now has a _naked_ rugrat crawling on his head....
19:41:55 stevenknight gah. check this out from SConf.py:
19:42:13 stevenknight # Because we take responsibility here for writing out our
19:42:13 stevenknight # own .sconsign info (see SConfBuildTask.execute(), above),
19:42:13 stevenknight # we override the store_info() method with a null place-holder
19:42:13 stevenknight # so we really control how it gets written.
19:42:13 stevenknight # Because we take responsibility here for writing out our
19:42:14 stevenknight # own .sconsign info (see SConfBuildTask.execute(), above),
19:42:16 stevenknight # we override the store_info() method with a null place-holder
19:42:18 stevenknight # so we really control how it gets written.
19:42:25 stevenknight oops, sorry for the dup, didn't realize it was already in my buffer
19:42:38 GregNoel happens to all of us
19:42:53 stevenknight that module does a lot of "clever" stuff like that
19:42:58 garyo-home I knew there had to be some bad magic there.
19:43:05 stevenknight kind of impressive, actually, but it makes things kinda fragile
19:43:07 GregNoel so something special is saved, but what, exactly?
19:43:11 garyo-home Cause it does work for me on a daily basis.
19:43:49 GregNoel The sconsign command doesn't slow it (which may not be a surprise)
19:43:49 stevenknight Here's its custom build info class:
19:43:51 stevenknight class SConfBuildInfo(SCons.Node.FS.FileBuildInfo):
19:43:51 stevenknight """
19:43:51 stevenknight Special build info for targets of configure tests. Additional members
19:43:51 stevenknight are result (did the builder succeed last time?) and string, which
19:43:51 stevenknight contains messages of the original build phase.
19:43:52 stevenknight """
19:43:56 stevenknight result = None # -> 0/None -> no error, != 0 error
19:43:58 stevenknight string = None # the stdout / stderr output when building the target
19:44:00 stevenknight def set_build_result(self, result, string):
19:44:02 stevenknight self.result = result
19:44:04 stevenknight self.string = string
19:44:50 stevenknight so there's a little magic at work
19:44:59 GregNoel Major magic
19:45:06 stevenknight yeah, sconsign doesn't know anything about all this
19:45:09 stevenknight it should
19:45:19 stevenknight i sense a new issue being opened...
19:45:27 GregNoel you bet
19:45:58 garyo-home But that makes me wonder what this bug is about. It should work as is.
19:46:00 stevenknight working it
19:47:28 garyo-home I bet Configure isn't overriding the main signature method hard enough.
19:48:09 stevenknight it dates back to 0.96.95, might have been fixed since then
19:48:29 stevenknight sounds like this needs research
19:48:48 GregNoel OK, you?
19:49:13 stevenknight ok
19:49:23 garyo-home I just tried it, it works for me on the trunk.
19:49:23 stevenknight i can go with gary's classification: 1.x, p3, me
19:49:33 GregNoel done
19:49:40 stevenknight or do we just call it WORKSFORME and let it get re-opened if necessary?
19:50:03 GregNoel hmmm..... Yes, I like that better
19:50:08 GregNoel close issues if we can
19:50:16 garyo-home Well, it works for *me*, on Ubuntu, python2.5. But if you guys trust me that much... :-)
19:50:25 stevenknight oh, but we do!
19:50:36 GregNoel Gary, will you close it with that comment? Tell him to reopen it if it's still a problem.
19:50:46 garyo-home OK.
19:50:47 stevenknight done
19:50:58 stevenknight 1580:
19:51:16 stevenknight 1.x p3 rob
19:51:16 GregNoel rob
19:51:25 GregNoel works for me
19:51:44 stevenknight 1597: 1.x p3 bill
19:52:25 GregNoel yes, works; thanks, Bill, for volunteering
19:52:21 stevenknight 1604: 1.x p4 greg
19:52:51 GregNoel 1604, yes, add it to my list
19:53:47 stevenknight 1545: 1.x p2 greg?
19:54:04 GregNoel p2? Hmmm, ok
19:54:28 garyo-home I'd recommend p3 but p2 is ok
19:54:39 stevenknight i was going from the spreadsheet, i'm okay with p3
19:55:00 GregNoel It's not a hard job, but finding all the places will take some shaking out.
19:55:05 stevenknight yes
19:55:50 GregNoel ok, I'm good with p2
19:56:10 GregNoel I think that ends this spreadsheet and I need to go
19:56:19 garyo-home Good work all!
19:56:34 stevenknight very good, thanks
19:56:35 garyo-home Can you guys do next wk at the same time?
19:56:37 GregNoel see you guys next week? What time?
19:56:52 stevenknight good for me
19:56:56 GregNoel This time would be better for me (19h00)
19:57:03 stevenknight okay, let's go with it
19:57:14 stevenknight hmm, i was hoping David would make it too
19:57:24 stevenknight oh, well, we made good progress
19:57:26 garyo-home This worked well for me. See you then! Maybe David next week?
19:57:31 GregNoel yes
19:57:42 stevenknight all right, next week, same bat time, same bat station
19:57:50 GregNoel OK, I've got the logs, so I'll update that tommorrow
19:57:55 garyo-home great. Who's entering the data into tigris?
19:58:05 GregNoel You guys
19:58:14 garyo-home OK, I did it last time & it was easy.
19:58:16 stevenknight you did it last week, i'll take it this week?
19:58:24 garyo-home OK, your turn then.
19:58:32 garyo-home thanks!
19:58:41 * GregNoel attacked by rugrats, gotta go!
19:58:43 stevenknight 'night all

BugParty/IrcLog2008-06-23 (last edited 2008-06-24 22:29:41 by GregNoel)