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 18:51:57 *	stevenknight (n=stevenkn@c-69-181-234-155.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) has joined #scons
   2 19:00:21 <stevenknight>	hello, anyone else here for bugs?
   3 19:01:28 *	garyo-home (n=chatzill@209-6-158-38.c3-0.smr-ubr3.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com) has joined #scons
   4 19:02:19 <garyo-home>	Hi, folks.  Thought I'd log in & do some of my bug homework, but now I see it's tonight!
   5 19:02:42 <stevenknight>	hi gary
   6 19:02:45 <stevenknight>	just you and me so far
   7 19:02:55 <stevenknight>	no thanks to my confusion about days...  :-/
   8 19:02:56 <garyo-home>	OK; let me get my windows set up.
   9 19:03:15 <garyo-home>	yah, I thought it was going to be tomorrow, oh well, in some ways this is better.
  10 19:03:34 <stevenknight>	hopefully greg will have seen the reply and show up as well
  11 19:03:50 <stevenknight>	if not we need to decide if we go ahead just us two or not
  12 19:03:54 <garyo-home>	yes, his msg was only 1.5 hrs ago
  13 19:04:14 <garyo-home>	I think two is not a quorum, though we could do some obvious ones anyway...
  14 19:04:29 <stevenknight>	true, just clear out the obvious consensus
  15 19:04:32 <stevenknight>	that's still valuable
  16 19:05:04 <GregNoel>	Hi, I'm here, but not set up yet; give me a minute
  17 19:05:09 <garyo-home>	Hi, Greg!
  18 19:05:41 <stevenknight>	np, take your time
  19 19:09:14 <garyo-home>	Sounds like the scons dinners have been fun.
  20 19:09:18 <GregNoel>	OK, I'm up
  21 19:09:38 <garyo-home>	OK, shall we dive into the current issues then?
  22 19:09:47 <GregNoel>	I'm ready
  23 19:10:00 <stevenknight>	okay, 2098:  consensus
  24 19:10:06 <garyo-home>	2098: who should integrate?  Steven?
  25 19:10:07 <stevenknight>	1.x p3
  26 19:10:12 <stevenknight>	yes, me
  27 19:10:14 <GregNoel>	done
  28 19:10:18 <stevenknight>	2114:
  29 19:10:37 <stevenknight>	1.0x p2 david
  30 19:10:46 <garyo-home>	sounds right.
  31 19:10:52 <GregNoel>	works for me
  32 19:10:53 <stevenknight>	done
  33 19:10:59 <stevenknight>	2115:
  34 19:11:17 <stevenknight>	any objections to 1.x p3?
  35 19:11:28 <garyo-home>	for doing it as its own separate task?
  36 19:11:42 <stevenknight>	say more
  37 19:11:45 <garyo-home>	i.e. just making sconsign understand that special case
  38 19:11:48 <GregNoel>	it's the default; we'll have to triage those again, but it's fine.
  39 19:12:03 <stevenknight>	yes, by default
  40 19:12:06 <garyo-home>	ok, fine.
  41 19:12:23 *	garyo-home avoids long sconf discussion
  42 19:12:25 <stevenknight>	all right, 1.x p3
  43 19:12:48 <stevenknight>	ah, right -- i get it
  44 19:13:00 <stevenknight>	yes, not as part of the whole big SConf brouhaha on the MLs right now
  45 19:12:58 <GregNoel>	sigh, things get out of control when one is gone; there's a silverfish crawling across my desk...
  46 19:13:20 <garyo-home>	greg: gross!
  47 19:13:30 <GregNoel>	very
  48 19:13:45 <garyo-home>	ok, on to 2116? 2116: I agree w/ you guys.
  49 19:13:52 <stevenknight>	2116:  1.0x p2 consensus
  50 19:13:56 <stevenknight>	Benoit
  51 19:14:01 <GregNoel>	done
  52 19:14:16 <stevenknight>	2117:
  53 19:14:32 <garyo-home>	I don't think scons should delete anything read-only.
  54 19:14:36 <stevenknight>	i kind of like greg's classification, actually... :-)
  55 19:14:40 <garyo-home>	:-)
  56 19:14:45 <GregNoel>	er, it already does....
  57 19:14:52 <stevenknight>	yes
  58 19:14:54 <garyo-home>	greg: yes, you're right.
  59 19:15:05 <garyo-home>	... e.g. before building.
  60 19:15:10 <stevenknight>	i don't agree w/his solution (make it writable silently)
  61 19:15:21 <stevenknight>	but would want some configurability / option that permits it
  62 19:15:23 <garyo-home>	steven: I agree, it's rude & could have bad consequences.
  63 19:15:33 <GregNoel>	actually, I was surprised that SCons deletes files before rebuilding them, but that's another discussion
  64 19:16:03 <garyo-home>	so can we just say wontfix?
  65 19:16:19 <stevenknight>	i'd rather turn it into a feature request for the configurability
  66 19:16:36 <garyo-home>	OK, 2.x p3 feature req would be OK by me
  67 19:16:42 <stevenknight>	i can go with 2.x
  68 19:16:48 <GregNoel>	done
  69 19:16:55 <stevenknight>	on reflection, it is definitely lower priority than other 1.x stuff
  70 19:17:00 <stevenknight>	2119:
  71 19:17:20 <stevenknight>	consensus 1.0.x p2
  72 19:17:30 <garyo-home>	sure.
  73 19:17:28 <stevenknight>	i'm definitely going to fix this soon for my own purposes
  74 19:17:43 <stevenknight>	like, tomorrow
  75 19:17:58 <stevenknight>	(but not check it into branches/core yet)
  76 19:17:58 <GregNoel>	works for me
  77 19:18:00 <garyo-home>	OK.
  78 19:18:11 <stevenknight>	okay, on to 2006h2?
  79 19:18:21 <garyo-home>	ok, I'm there.
  80 19:18:27 *	GregNoel has visitors at the door
  81 19:18:34 <garyo-home>	1437, consensus
  82 19:18:49 <stevenknight>	yes, 1437 dup
  83 19:18:52 <stevenknight>	done
  84 19:18:57 *	garyo-home needs a drink, brb
  85 19:19:27 <stevenknight>	1438:
  86 19:19:39 <stevenknight>	consensus 1.x p3 me
  87 19:19:46 <stevenknight>	i can go w/you guys on the time frame
  88 19:19:58 *	stevenknight whistles aimlessly while waiting for everyone else to return...
  89 19:20:06 <garyo-home>	hi, I'm back
  90 19:20:18 <garyo-home>	1438 1.x p3 is fine w/ me.
  91 19:20:26 <garyo-home>	There's plenty to do before then.
  92 19:20:50 <stevenknight>	done
  93 19:21:01 <stevenknight>	1439:  i can go w/invalid
  94 19:21:23 <bdbaddog>	which spreadsheet are you guys on now?
  95 19:21:24 <stevenknight>	i was thinking research because it *is* kind of a pain to hook up new builders
  96 19:21:28 <stevenknight>	hey bill
  97 19:21:30 <garyo-home>	1439: and tell him to use src_builder?  I guess after this long he probably doesn't care anymore...
  98 19:21:30 <stevenknight>	2006h2
  99 19:21:47 <stevenknight>	sure, as a courtesy for closing it out
 100 19:21:48 <bdbaddog>	Hey. I'll just be here a few, but I'll add what I can.
 101 19:21:55 <garyo-home>	Hi Bill.
 102 19:21:57 <stevenknight>	bdbaddog:  cool
 103 19:22:19 <stevenknight>	so 1439: invalid, point him to src_builder
 104 19:22:35 <garyo-home>	re 1439: I'd like a new ticket for making adding src builders easier.
 105 19:22:38 <stevenknight>	i'd still like another issue for some feature (API extension?) to make it easier to hook up your own builders to our existing ones
 106 19:22:42 <garyo-home>	+1
 107 19:22:47 <stevenknight>	+1
 108 19:22:58 <bdbaddog>	Like AddToCBuilder?
 109 19:23:20 *	stevenknight applauds garyo-home's ability to put things much more economically
 110 19:23:31 <garyo-home>	bdbaddog: Maybe, but let's not design it now, just make a ticket for later.
 111 19:23:33 <stevenknight>	bdbaddog:  something like that
 112 19:23:54 <stevenknight>	i'd genericize it somehow (wave hands mumble mumble)
 113 19:24:03 <garyo-home>	yes.
 114 19:24:12 <bdbaddog>	:) yeah. that's probably why it's not done already.
 115 19:24:43 <garyo-home>	1442, folks?
 116 19:24:46 <stevenknight>	1442:  sounds like greg's right
 117 19:25:02 <garyo-home>	In that case, maybe it's already better due to David's stuff?
 118 19:25:29 <stevenknight>	maybe
 119 19:25:33 <garyo-home>	Anyone have a mingw env?
 120 19:26:01 <garyo-home>	ok, guess not.
 121 19:26:08 <stevenknight>	not me
 122 19:26:23 <stevenknight>	i really want to set up buildbots with the more common windows configs
 123 19:26:28 <GregNoel>	1439: concur (I'm back, BTW)
 124 19:26:30 <stevenknight>	one for MinGW, one for Cygwin, etc.
 125 19:27:36 <bdbaddog>	looks like I have cygwin with mingw-g77 installed.
 126 19:27:48 <stevenknight>	the more i think about it, the more 1442 seems like a really interesting case
 127 19:27:57 <GregNoel>	how so?
 128 19:28:04 <stevenknight>	conceptually i agree w/Greg's analysis that .f is clearly an error
 129 19:28:21 <stevenknight>	but if so, how would you specify the weird corner case where you really *did* want to archive .f files?
 130 19:28:46 <stevenknight>	after all, there's no reason why you should be prohibited from doing that
 131 19:29:00 <stevenknight>	just because there's a more common use case of .f files generating .o files
 132 19:29:13 <GregNoel>	You need an "ar" builder, not a library builder
 133 19:29:13 <garyo-home>	... or .c files for that matter.  Maybe File nodes would do it?
 134 19:29:33 <stevenknight>	hmm, interesting distinction
 135 19:29:36 <bdbaddog>	doesn mingw builder setup fortran at all?
 136 19:29:44 <GregNoel>	The archive builders take any file suffix
 137 19:30:26 <stevenknight>	hmm, i think Gary's right -- File nodes circumvent the suffix checking
 138 19:30:41 <bdbaddog>	nope. mingw sets up the following:
 139 19:30:41 <bdbaddog>	    gnu_tools = ['gcc', 'g++', 'gnulink', 'ar', 'gas', 'm4']
 140 19:30:42 <GregNoel>	you sure?
 141 19:30:49 <stevenknight>	nope
 142 19:31:18 <stevenknight>	but i am worried that the distinction between a "library" (a .a file with objects) and an "archive" (the same suffix but with different contents) would be really subtle and easily lost
 143 19:32:02 <garyo-home>	It's a pretty atypical case though.
 144 19:32:05 <GregNoel>	Uh, "ar" archives don't have a .a suffix; that's only for libraries.
 145 19:32:30 <GregNoel>	The suffix is usually .ar or none at all
 146 19:32:58 <garyo-home>	greg: never seen such a thing myself.
 147 19:33:01 <stevenknight>	yeah, the case is atypical
 148 19:33:10 <stevenknight>	but i think the potential for confusion remains
 149 19:33:19 <stevenknight>	if there is more than one builder that causes "ar" to be invoked
 150 19:33:48 <bdbaddog>	has anyone run into a build which used ar for things other than static libraries?
 151 19:33:50 <garyo-home>	They could always use Command() if Library() doesn't do what they want.
 152 19:33:51 <GregNoel>	Really?  More than one builder causes 'gcc' to be invoked...
 153 19:34:11 <stevenknight>	hmm, fair point.  i'm probably worrying needlessly
 154 19:34:21 <garyo-home>	I think so :-)
 155 19:34:25 <GregNoel>	bdbaddog, you're not old enough; the evolution was the other way around
 156 19:35:04 <GregNoel>	'ar' was used to build archives; eventually, archives of .o files were acceptable to the linker
 157 19:35:15 <garyo-home>	So where does that leave 1442?
 158 19:35:41 <stevenknight>	dup
 159 19:35:45 <GregNoel>	dup
 160 19:35:48 <garyo-home>	ok.
 161 19:35:56 <bdbaddog>	dup of ?
 162 19:36:04 <bdbaddog>	mingw builder doesn't setup g77...
 163 19:36:09 <garyo-home>	1437 says the ssheet.
 164 19:36:34 <GregNoel>	That's "better error messages when tool not configured"
 165 19:37:10 <stevenknight>	ah, but bill's point is good:  our default doesn't even make this possible
 166 19:37:17 <bdbaddog>	ahh. o.k. well it's a dup and also it's mingw doesn't setup g77 though.
 167 19:38:07 <bdbaddog>	o.k. gents. I may have a patch for that. I've gotta head out for a while though. I'll shoot an email later with pach if I get it working.
 168 19:38:20 <garyo-home>	There's also 1895, g77 and gfortran not detected on windows  which is about mingw.
 169 19:39:21 <garyo-home>	Seems like 1442 could be a dup of 1895.
 170 19:39:49 <GregNoel>	(other way around; use the earlier issue as the basis)
 171 19:40:08 <garyo-home>	greg: you're right.
 172 19:40:59 <garyo-home>	1895 is research, p3, david.  So mark 1895 as dup of 1442, and make 1442 research, p3, david.
 173 19:41:18 <GregNoel>	done; 1443?
 174 19:41:58 <garyo-home>	There is now a SHFORTRANFLAGS, so I presume it could get set to /fPIC if appropriate.
 175 19:42:13 <GregNoel>	oops, brb
 176 19:42:36 <garyo-home>	But it's clearly David's if it's still broken.  1.0.x p3 David?
 177 19:45:03 <garyo-home>	Can we just give 1449 and 1450 to Jim, 1.x p3, keyword "quoting"?
 178 19:45:34 <garyo-home>	h'lo?
 179 19:46:06 *	sgk_ (n=stevenkn@c-69-181-234-155.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) has joined #scons
 180 19:46:23 <sgk_>	hmm, looks like the server i was connected to died
 181 19:46:29 <garyo-home>	Hi again, didn't even see you drop out.
 182 19:46:31 <sgk_>	what was the last you got from me?
 183 19:46:41 <garyo-home>	"our default doesn't even make this possible"
 184 19:47:05 <sgk_>	so maybe it's a one liner of 'g77' (or more likely 'gfortran') to the mingw tool list
 185 19:47:26 <sgk_>	anyone object to that solution for...  1.x p3?
 186 19:47:33 <garyo-home>	Yes, just after you dropped out bdbaddog said: "o.k. gents. I may have a patch for that. I've gotta head out for a while though. I'll shoot an email later with pach if I get it working."
 187 19:47:53 <garyo-home>	If it's trivial, could be in 1.0.x, right?
 188 19:48:00 <sgk_>	yeah
 189 19:48:06 <sgk_>	1.0.x p3?
 190 19:48:09 <garyo-home>	OK.
 191 19:48:12 <sgk_>	done
 192 19:48:19 <garyo-home>	Can we just give 1449 and 1450 to Jim, 1.x p3, keyword "quoting"?
 193 19:48:34 <sgk_>	+1
 194 19:48:39 <garyo-home>	sorry, "research" ?
 195 19:49:02 <garyo-home>	research was the ssheet consensus but I kind of think it's 1.x timeframe stuff.
 196 19:49:06 <sgk_>	sure, research
 197 19:49:14 <sgk_>	research p3 "quoting"
 198 19:49:20 <sgk_>	done
 199 19:49:22 <GregNoel>	dkjak
 200 19:49:23 <garyo-home>	good.
 201 19:49:30 <sgk_>	1452:
 202 19:49:46 <sgk_>	1.x p3 me
 203 19:49:48 <garyo-home>	sounds like that one's yours, Steven.
 204 19:49:58 <garyo-home>	ok, done.
 205 19:50:06 <GregNoel>	yes
 206 19:50:15 <sgk_>	1456:  research, me "VisualStudio"
 207 19:50:55 <garyo-home>	maybe, but I like "invalid" -- can't just have msvc as the *only* tool.
 208 19:51:21 <GregNoel>	true, but a better message would help
 209 19:51:47 <garyo-home>	fine, in that case it's dup of the "better errors" one, not VisualStudio.
 210 19:51:51 <sgk_>	oh, hey, even better
 211 19:52:04 <sgk_>	that makes it a toolchain issue and i can give it to you guys...  :-)
 212 19:52:18 <GregNoel>	that's why I said dup 1437, better messages
 213 19:52:20 <sgk_>	invalid is good, though
 214 19:52:31 <sgk_>	either one is fine w/me 
 215 19:52:41 <GregNoel>	Let's go with dup
 216 19:52:53 <garyo-home>	Yes, that gives the OP more info.
 217 19:53:00 <sgk_>	ok, dup 1437
 218 19:53:03 <GregNoel>	done
 219 19:53:23 <sgk_>	1458:  dup 1437 as well
 220 19:53:24 <garyo-home>	1458, same.
 221 19:53:27 <GregNoel>	yes
 222 19:53:54 <garyo-home>	1459, does Ludwig have a prototype of this already?
 223 19:53:55 <sgk_>	1459:  Ludwig
 224 19:54:10 <garyo-home>	+1
 225 19:54:18 <GregNoel>	He was looking at it; I think he has an idea
 226 19:54:44 <garyo-home>	Good.
 227 19:54:44 <GregNoel>	His experiments showed very little impact due to the size of buffer
 228 19:54:54 *	stevenknight has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
 229 19:55:12 <sgk_>	Ludwig, any appropriate target milestone + priority
 230 19:55:18 <GregNoel>	done
 231 19:55:59 <GregNoel>	1460
 232 19:56:00 <sgk_>	1460:  i'm agnostic
 233 19:56:20 <GregNoel>	interesting choice of word...
 234 19:56:50 <garyo-home>	I can take it.  Any time; 1.0.x p3?
 235 19:56:56 <sgk_>	works for me
 236 19:57:07 <GregNoel>	works
 237 19:57:09 <garyo-home>	ok.
 238 19:57:22 <sgk_>	1462:  worksforme
 239 19:57:26 <sgk_>	i'm a dual core
 240 19:57:39 <sgk_>	it can be re-opened if it's still a problem elsewhere
 241 19:57:40 <garyo-home>	Sounds like you tried pretty hard to repro it.
 242 19:57:48 <garyo-home>	worksforme works for me.
 243 19:57:50 <sgk_>	but my guess is some of Benoit's Taskmaster changes have fixed it
 244 19:57:53 <sgk_>	:-)
 245 19:58:11 <GregNoel>	That would be my guess as well
 246 19:58:26 <garyo-home>	1464: agree, wontfix.
 247 19:58:33 <sgk_>	done
 248 19:58:46 <GregNoel>	done
 249 19:58:58 <sgk_>	1466:  me, research, VisualStudio
 250 19:59:15 <sgk_>	agree w/Greg that it might end up in toolchain, but i'm happy to be stuck with it in the meantime
 251 19:59:14 <GregNoel>	OK, worst case you toss it to us.
 252 19:59:21 <sgk_>	yes
 253 19:59:33 <garyo-home>	ok.
 254 19:59:40 <sgk_>	1468:  1.0.x p2?
 255 19:59:57 <GregNoel>	at least
 256 20:00:02 <sgk_>	sounds pretty serious
 257 20:00:15 <garyo-home>	People must be working around it.
 258 20:00:26 <GregNoel>	working by blind luck is another way of saying pretty serious...
 259 20:00:33 <sgk_>	yeah
 260 20:00:37 <sgk_>	1.0.x p1?
 261 20:00:43 <garyo-home>	ok w/ me.
 262 20:00:48 <GregNoel>	yes
 263 20:00:52 <sgk_>	done
 264 20:01:21 <sgk_>	1469:  d'oh!  wonfix
 265 20:01:24 <sgk_>	wontfix
 266 20:01:25 <sgk_>	greg is right
 267 20:01:32 <garyo-home>	agreed.
 268 20:01:36 <GregNoel>	done
 269 20:01:41 <sgk_>	1471:  closed
 270 20:01:43 <sgk_>	1476:
 271 20:01:57 <sgk_>	research, me
 272 20:02:13 <sgk_>	(sorry, trying to get through these quick, I have to start winding down)
 273 20:02:30 <sgk_>	1478:  research, me, VisualStudio
 274 20:02:34 <garyo-home>	Me too.  OK, 1476 is yours.
 275 20:02:48 <sgk_>	1478:  gary, fixed?
 276 20:02:48 <GregNoel>	1476: you're welcome to it
 277 20:02:53 <sgk_>	1483:  gary, fixed?
 278 20:03:05 <garyo-home>	1478: hopefully will be overtaken by vsvars.bat stuff
 279 20:03:31 <sgk_>	yes re: 1478 & vsvars.bat
 280 20:03:51 <sgk_>	1488:  1.x p3 me
 281 20:04:07 <garyo-home>	1483: yes, I consider that fixed.
 282 20:04:44 <sgk_>	cool
 283 20:04:49 <GregNoel>	Now would be a good time for me to quit; our guests are watching the football game...
 284 20:05:01 <garyo-home>	I should go too.  Next week?
 285 20:05:03 <sgk_>	and i have a dog that needs walking and won't wait
 286 20:05:09 <sgk_>	same time?
 287 20:05:13 <garyo-home>	OK for me.
 288 20:05:17 <GregNoel>	done
 289 20:05:23 <GregNoel>	later, all...
 290 20:05:24 <garyo-home>	good, bye for now!
 291 20:05:28 <sgk_>	done (and i'll remember Monday night this time...)
 292 20:05:29 <sgk_>	later..
 293 20:05:36 *	sgk_ has quit ("Leaving")
 294 20:05:45 *	garyo-home has quit ("ChatZilla 0.9.83 [Firefox 3.0/2008052906]")
 295 

BugParty/IrcLog2008-06-30 (last edited 2008-07-04 18:08:05 by ip68-7-77-81)