17:18:02 * bdbaddog (n=bdeegan@adsl-71-131-30-2.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net) has joined #scons
18:51:06 * stevenknight (n=stevenkn@69.36.227.131) has joined #scons
18:51:35 * GregoryNoel is no longer marked as being away
18:51:48 GregoryNoel Hey, Steven...
18:53:59 stevenknight hi greg
18:54:26 GregoryNoel I hope Gary can make it; he sounded dragged out in his note.
18:54:30 stevenknight on the late shuttle tonight, so i turn into a pumpkin early :-(
18:54:36 stevenknight agreed re: Gary
18:55:22 stevenknight he said he'd updated the spreadsheet, but i only see his comments on early issues
18:56:05 * GregoryNoel is still pulling up the spreadsheet
18:59:22 GregoryNoel Ah, Brandon is adding comments. But you're right; I don't see Gary's comments past the initial few.
19:00:34 GregoryNoel Brandon, are you here for the bug meeting?
19:00:46 GregoryNoel Or anyone else?
19:02:48 Azverkan I'm here
19:02:52 Azverkan was still typing
19:03:00 GregoryNoel Hey, Brandon...
19:03:10 stevenknight hi brandon
19:03:43 Azverkan hey
19:04:04 GregoryNoel Can you keep going, but split your attention here?
19:04:09 Azverkan yep
19:04:19 GregoryNoel OK, shall we proceed?
19:04:23 stevenknight since we have three + gary's comments, and the clock's ticking, shall we get started then?
19:04:26 stevenknight yes
19:04:35 stevenknight 2133:
19:05:01 stevenknight the more that i think about it, i'm on the fence like gary
19:05:44 GregoryNoel I think I'd move from INVALID to WONTFIX, but I still think it's not a bug
19:05:44 stevenknight but it's still pretty common and not unreasonable usage
19:06:00 GregoryNoel Really? What's the use case?
19:06:16 stevenknight hmm, well maybe not *common* per se
19:06:21 stevenknight just surprising
19:06:38 stevenknight you want to run a post-processing script after building the target
19:06:48 stevenknight the post-processing script is built locally in your tree
19:07:09 stevenknight you AddPostAction() the script and expect that SCons will make sure it's built before it tries to execute it
19:07:16 stevenknight like it does with the regular Actions
19:07:39 GregoryNoel Yeah, but the next run, the post-processing doesn't get done since the command is already built.
19:07:36 stevenknight i guess it comes down to whether or not people should think an Action is an Action is an Action
19:07:54 stevenknight regardless of whether a Builder or AddPostAction associates it with the target
19:08:21 GregoryNoel I think it's bad design, for sure
19:08:32 stevenknight AddPostAction() in general? I agree
19:08:44 GregoryNoel No, this use case, running a command as part of its own build.
19:08:50 stevenknight ah
19:09:04 GregoryNoel I just don't see any real reason to run the command just after building it and no other time.
19:09:05 Azverkan Feels more like a side effect of how builders are implemented that being a required feature to me
19:09:47 stevenknight I don't know, i do see people using it for things like unit test executables
19:10:03 Azverkan You have two types of these post actions, some that you want to always run and some that you only want to run after the executable changes
19:10:09 GregoryNoel For unit tests, you can use a synthetic target
19:10:12 stevenknight but you can argue that's just because we do a lousy job with tests right now
19:10:27 Azverkan and in both cases they may or may not have real targets, but fake targets like the windows registry getting updated etc...
19:10:37 * stevenknight agrees with Azverkan
19:10:47 Azverkan I think the real fix is to make Alias() more interchangeable with File()
19:11:03 GregoryNoel yes
19:11:05 stevenknight yes yes yes
19:11:07 Azverkan there are some cases where you have to make a File() that does not exist to work around limitations in Alias()
19:11:21 GregoryNoel yes
19:11:41 stevenknight okay, i can see WONTFIXing this in favor of a more comprehensive solution involving being able to use Alias
19:11:48 stevenknight as both a source and a real Dependency
19:11:53 GregoryNoel I'll go for that.
19:12:04 stevenknight like Brandon said
19:12:16 stevenknight okay, done
19:13:00 stevenknight I'll open a new one to track the Alias-wherever-you-can-use-File enhancement
19:12:51 GregoryNoel 2134
19:13:03 stevenknight 2134:
19:13:45 stevenknight Greg, did you have a particular 2.x feature in mind to make this easier?
19:13:46 GregoryNoel 2133 spinoff: "Synthetic Targets"
19:13:55 stevenknight oh, wait, just saw it in your comment
19:13:57 GregoryNoel 'attribute'
19:14:30 stevenknight gotta transfer buses, expect short disconnect
19:14:40 * stevenknight has quit ("Leaving")
19:16:35 * stevenknight (n=stevenkn@69.36.227.135) has joined #scons
19:16:41 GregoryNoel I just don't know if it's worth trying to implement in the 1.x timeframe if we're just going to reengineer it in 2.x, especially since 1.x is already getting so full.
19:16:47 stevenknight and we're back...
19:17:11 stevenknight yeah, 1.x is definitely full
19:17:19 stevenknight no one's beating down the doors for this
19:17:25 stevenknight let's go ahead and push it out to 2.x
19:17:30 stevenknight (assume we're still on 2134)
19:17:37 GregoryNoel works for me (yes)
19:17:57 stevenknight okay, 2134, 2.x, p3 (?)
19:18:10 GregoryNoel yes, issues@scons
19:18:25 stevenknight 2135: consensus 1.0.x p2
19:18:34 GregoryNoel done
19:18:41 stevenknight 2136: consensus 1.x p2
19:18:46 GregoryNoel done
19:19:00 stevenknight 2137: consensus 1.0 p3
19:19:08 GregoryNoel yes, but who?
19:19:49 stevenknight guess it partly depends on how soon we push out 1.0
19:20:12 GregoryNoel I think it should be within a week; it's aged enough.
19:20:12 stevenknight i'll take it, unless you have any text you've already started
19:20:22 stevenknight agree re: aged enough
19:20:31 GregoryNoel no, in fact, I think I'm too close to it
19:20:27 stevenknight 2137: 1.0 p3 stevenknight
19:20:38 GregoryNoel done
19:21:01 GregoryNoel 2138
19:21:12 stevenknight 2138: consensus 1.0.x p2
19:21:13 stevenknight me
19:21:22 GregoryNoel ok, works
19:21:39 stevenknight 2140: changed my mind, 2.x p4
19:21:50 stevenknight move it up if someone actually comes up with a good interface for it
19:21:58 stevenknight (the underlying hook, i mean)
19:22:10 GregoryNoel okay
19:22:37 stevenknight 2141: 1.0.x p2, me
19:22:40 GregoryNoel 2141, consensus
19:22:47 Azverkan 2140: I'd think that the hook would probably be driven more by distributed build requirements like IncrediBuild than the actual submitted bug
19:23:18 stevenknight 2140: agree that that's a more compelling reason than this particular use case
19:23:37 stevenknight but someone still has to care enough to pony up the code
19:24:05 * Azverkan is at the moment I'm worried about the GIL not getting fixed in Py3k
19:24:10 stevenknight 2142: consensus dup
19:24:35 GregoryNoel 2142, I added a comment to 2132 asking that he takes makes sure it uses env[ENV]
19:24:29 stevenknight 2143: consensus 1.x p2 david
19:24:46 GregoryNoel 2143, done
19:24:47 stevenknight cool, thanks
19:24:52 stevenknight (re: 2142)
19:25:36 stevenknight 2144: Brandon, can you say more about the Windows API issue at work here
19:26:01 Azverkan It's probably more complicated than we want to spend on it
19:26:01 GregoryNoel 2144, I agree with Steven's comment, but we should ask Benoit about it.
19:26:16 Azverkan But basically Ctrl-C event and job trees is the root of the issue
19:26:31 stevenknight on the discussion or on actually fixing it (or working around it) in SCons?
19:26:32 Azverkan Unix sends signals to subprocesses differently than windows does
19:26:39 GregoryNoel Is the original issue from Windoze?
19:26:46 stevenknight yes, IIRC
19:26:58 Azverkan yeah
19:27:16 Azverkan it gets even nastier if you have a scons running inside a scons running inside a scons or something like that
19:27:16 GregoryNoel Then it looks like Brandon is volunteering.... {;-}
19:27:33 Azverkan I dont think it's something we can ever fix on the command line without an IPC layer
19:28:11 Azverkan but the named event hack I did in the past worked well enough that I could submit a patch
19:28:05 stevenknight basically something else wraps and just handles the interrupt
19:28:16 stevenknight and passes word in a controlled way to the back-end SCons process?
19:28:50 Azverkan in my case we just modified the gui to send the named event instead of the Ctrl-C or the Ctrl-Break which both have bugs (and different kinds)
19:29:04 Azverkan Ctrl-C corrupts scons and Ctrl-Break corrupts subtools
19:29:16 GregoryNoel Ah, Windo$e...
19:29:39 stevenknight and i assume the wrapper that handles the Ctrl-{C,Break} needs to be a separate task, not just a thread?
19:29:50 Azverkan yes and scons cannot be a child of that task
19:30:00 Azverkan so you have to spawn a task parented by the parent of scons
19:30:12 stevenknight what fun!
19:30:19 Azverkan detach the console from scons and reattach the console to that
19:30:27 Azverkan its probably not really worth the effort
19:30:32 * GregoryNoel wonders about Steven's idea of fun
19:30:48 Azverkan I'd put it off until we think about releasing 2.x
19:31:02 GregoryNoel Future? Or wontfix?
19:31:11 stevenknight future
19:31:17 Azverkan future because you will get new bugs otherwise
19:31:21 Azverkan over and over
19:31:31 stevenknight Brandon, could you add a write up describing the above so it gets captured?
19:31:32 GregoryNoel ok, what priority then?
19:31:39 Azverkan yeah
19:31:44 stevenknight thanks
19:31:46 stevenknight i'd say p2
19:31:56 stevenknight agree it sounds like a lot of effort
19:32:06 stevenknight but it goes to the heart of the "correct build" priority
19:32:07 GregoryNoel ... I was thinking p3 but I'll go with p2
19:32:17 GregoryNoel ah, good point
19:32:25 stevenknight okay, 2144, future, p2
19:32:29 GregoryNoel done
19:32:48 stevenknight 2145: research, me
19:33:13 GregoryNoel ok, done
19:33:29 stevenknight 2146: anytime
19:33:36 stevenknight me if no one else volunteers
19:33:44 GregoryNoel done
19:33:59 GregoryNoel I think you're the only one who understands it
19:33:52 stevenknight re: 2146
19:34:45 stevenknight if we scrap the surrogate stuff, what about generatiing the output with scripts modeled after the test/*.py infrastructure?
19:35:12 GregoryNoel say more?
19:35:52 stevenknight all of the in-line <scons_example> things
19:36:18 stevenknight get turned into a separate self-contained script based on the same API that the test/*.py tests use
19:36:41 stevenknight generating the example output becomes a matter of running some script like runtest.py
19:36:51 stevenknight that captures the output at the right step
19:37:32 GregoryNoel I'm not sure... It still seems awkward. Maybe you should start a thread on the dev list.
19:37:43 stevenknight your ideas about making it a more integrated part of the packaging build are on target regardless of this internal implementation detail
19:37:56 stevenknight okay, i can do that
19:38:10 GregoryNoel ok, I'll look for your message
19:38:22 stevenknight shall we try to make some progress on 2006H2?
19:38:29 GregoryNoel How about that? We finished the current issues!
19:38:39 * stevenknight rejoices
19:38:36 GregoryNoel Yes, onward
19:38:46 GregoryNoel only a few of those left now...
19:39:13 stevenknight cool
19:39:23 stevenknight net lag pulling up the spreadsheet...
19:39:25 stevenknight there we go
19:39:35 bdbaddog :)
19:39:36 stevenknight where did we leave off?
19:39:42 GregoryNoel 1437 is first
19:39:55 stevenknight 1437: consensus dup
19:39:57 stevenknight hey bill
19:40:23 bdbaddog Good evening. Gotta run in a few,but here for a few.
19:40:36 stevenknight cool, thanks
19:40:39 GregoryNoel Hey, Bill
19:40:42 bdbaddog timely 1437 is related to email thread Greg and I have been sharing.
19:40:49 stevenknight on 2006H2
19:40:49 stevenknight 1438: i
19:40:50 GregoryNoel yep
19:40:55 stevenknight try again
19:41:10 stevenknight 1438: I'm coming around to Bill's suggestion of 2.x and redoing this
19:42:09 stevenknight I'm starting to think I can kill off VariantDir by making the repository support more flexible
19:42:20 stevenknight let you really stack directories arbitrarily
19:42:33 GregoryNoel I tried to go there once; you shot me down.
19:42:45 stevenknight yep, i was wrong
19:42:51 bdbaddog sounds like it would support very complicated schemes, but would it be easy to to the simple case?
19:43:33 stevenknight i think so
19:43:49 bdbaddog worth a wiki page to discuss ?
19:43:54 bdbaddog and/or email thread.
19:43:57 GregoryNoel I'd certainly like to see a proposal
19:44:00 stevenknight sounds like it
19:44:16 Azverkan I'm also of the opinion that the current approach needs to replaced and since that would potentially require scripts to be updated it would have to be a 2.x feature
19:44:17 stevenknight probably research, p3, me then
19:44:30 bdbaddog ok guys. gotta run. sorry to be a short timer tonight.
19:44:37 GregoryNoel your research? That's 'anytime'
19:44:48 stevenknight :-)
19:45:21 GregoryNoel I'm not kidding; I plan to manipulate the ordering so 'anytime' always sorts just after the current release.
19:45:35 GregoryNoel Er, the next immediate release.
19:45:47 stevenknight right, but i'm actually somewhat serious too
19:46:02 stevenknight i've adopted your terminology and agree that "research" should be higher priority
19:46:10 stevenknight for reclassification
19:46:18 stevenknight even if i'm not consistent about doing that
19:46:37 GregoryNoel Hmmm, ok, then which do you mean?
19:46:41 stevenknight so i'd rather see this as "research" so the proposal has at least a shot at getting written up sooner rather than later
19:46:53 GregoryNoel I'll go for that
19:46:56 stevenknight if only because I have it staring at me reminding me i haven't done it yet...
19:47:08 GregoryNoel {;-}
19:47:18 stevenknight okay, 1438: research, sk
19:47:22 GregoryNoel done
19:47:42 GregoryNoel 1439, toolchain
19:47:49 stevenknight done
19:47:55 stevenknight (I could go with you on invalid, too)
19:48:19 stevenknight 1442: toolchain / dup 1437
19:48:23 stevenknight ?
19:48:36 GregoryNoel yes, invalid, I was thinking of another issue
19:49:19 stevenknight okay, just to be clear: 1439: invalid ?
19:49:23 Azverkan not convinced that 1439 is invalid
19:49:32 GregoryNoel 1439, yes
19:49:38 Azverkan but a decision that the project sure either make for or against
19:50:00 Azverkan seems like the current approach is that it is not supported
19:50:52 GregoryNoel uh, wait, 1439 has been already taken care of
19:51:11 Azverkan yeah there is like 10 in a row I think
19:51:14 stevenknight whoa, hang on, i already have a comment on here from July 1 saying this was getting closed
19:51:46 stevenknight but it looks like I didn't change the status
19:52:06 GregoryNoel Yes, it's marked invalid; it's still just in the spreadsheet.
19:52:06 stevenknight yeah, we've been through a bunch of these already
19:52:23 stevenknight ah, we only have 7 left from 2006H2
19:52:25 GregoryNoel next is 1490
19:52:48 stevenknight damn, i'm down to the last minute
19:52:55 stevenknight same time next week?
19:53:00 stevenknight we obviously won't have gary
19:53:15 stevenknight brandon, is this time good for you -- it's really helpful to have you here
19:53:48 Azverkan the earliest I get home by is 7:00PM west coast
19:54:24 Azverkan the time we have now is best for me so far
19:54:34 stevenknight okay, sounds good
19:54:35 GregoryNoel You can certainly join a little late, but would some other time be better?
19:55:02 Azverkan my work hours are more or less demand driven
19:55:07 stevenknight if so, say the word
19:55:13 Azverkan not really
19:55:20 stevenknight i'll assume same time (19h00 PDT) next week unless i hear otherwise
19:55:27 Azverkan I'm other completely busy or free by 1900
19:55:35 GregoryNoel OK, then we demand that you're here next time {;-}
19:55:30 stevenknight ....and i'm at my stop
19:55:32 stevenknight later...
19:55:35 * stevenknight has quit ("Leaving")
19:56:19 GregoryNoel I've got to go, too; le Tour de France calls...
19:56:25 GregoryNoel cul
19:56:34 * GregoryNoel has been marked as being away
21:55:33 * bdbaddog (n=bdeegan@adsl-71-131-30-2.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net) has left #scons

BugParty/IrcLog2008-07-21 (last edited 2008-07-22 18:09:23 by GregNoel)