-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 313
IrcLog2008 06 30
William Deegan edited this page Jan 14, 2016
·
2 revisions
18:51:57 * stevenknight (n=[stevenkn@c-69-181-234-155.hsd1.ca.comcast.net](mailto:stevenkn@c-69-181-234-155.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)) has joined #scons
19:00:21 <stevenknight> hello, anyone else here for bugs?
19:01:28 * garyo-home (n=[chatzill@209-6-158-38.c3-0.smr-ubr3.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com](mailto:chatzill@209-6-158-38.c3-0.smr-ubr3.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com)) has joined #scons
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!
19:02:42 <stevenknight> hi gary
19:02:45 <stevenknight> just you and me so far
19:02:55 <stevenknight> no thanks to my confusion about days... :-/
19:02:56 <garyo-home> OK; let me get my windows set up.
19:03:15 <garyo-home> yah, I thought it was going to be tomorrow, oh well, in some ways this is better.
19:03:34 <stevenknight> hopefully greg will have seen the reply and show up as well
19:03:50 <stevenknight> if not we need to decide if we go ahead just us two or not
19:03:54 <garyo-home> yes, his msg was only 1.5 hrs ago
19:04:14 <garyo-home> I think two is not a quorum, though we could do some obvious ones anyway...
19:04:29 <stevenknight> true, just clear out the obvious consensus
19:04:32 <stevenknight> that's still valuable
19:05:04 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> Hi, I'm here, but not set up yet; give me a minute
19:05:09 <garyo-home> Hi, Greg!
19:05:41 <stevenknight> np, take your time
19:09:14 <garyo-home> Sounds like the scons dinners have been fun.
19:09:18 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> OK, I'm up
19:09:38 <garyo-home> OK, shall we dive into the current issues then?
19:09:47 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> I'm ready
19:10:00 <stevenknight> okay, 2098: consensus
19:10:06 <garyo-home> 2098: who should integrate? Steven?
19:10:07 <stevenknight> 1.x p3
19:10:12 <stevenknight> yes, me
19:10:14 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> done
19:10:18 <stevenknight> 2114:
19:10:37 <stevenknight> 1.0x p2 david
19:10:46 <garyo-home> sounds right.
19:10:52 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> works for me
19:10:53 <stevenknight> done
19:10:59 <stevenknight> 2115:
19:11:17 <stevenknight> any objections to 1.x p3?
19:11:28 <garyo-home> for doing it as its own separate task?
19:11:42 <stevenknight> say more
19:11:45 <garyo-home> i.e. just making sconsign understand that special case
19:11:48 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> it's the default; we'll have to triage those again, but it's fine.
19:12:03 <stevenknight> yes, by default
19:12:06 <garyo-home> ok, fine.
19:12:23 * garyo-home avoids long sconf discussion
19:12:25 <stevenknight> all right, 1.x p3
19:12:48 <stevenknight> ah, right -- i get it
19:13:00 <stevenknight> yes, not as part of the whole big SConf brouhaha on the MLs right now
19:12:58 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> sigh, things get out of control when one is gone; there's a silverfish crawling across my desk...
19:13:20 <garyo-home> greg: gross!
19:13:30 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> very
19:13:45 <garyo-home> ok, on to 2116? 2116: I agree w/ you guys.
19:13:52 <stevenknight> 2116: 1.0x p2 consensus
19:13:56 <stevenknight> Benoit
19:14:01 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> done
19:14:16 <stevenknight> 2117:
19:14:32 <garyo-home> I don't think scons should delete anything read-only.
19:14:36 <stevenknight> i kind of like greg's classification, actually... :-)
19:14:40 <garyo-home> :-)
19:14:45 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> er, it already does....
19:14:52 <stevenknight> yes
19:14:54 <garyo-home> greg: yes, you're right.
19:15:05 <garyo-home> ... e.g. before building.
19:15:10 <stevenknight> i don't agree w/his solution (make it writable silently)
19:15:21 <stevenknight> but would want some configurability / option that permits it
19:15:23 <garyo-home> steven: I agree, it's rude & could have bad consequences.
19:15:33 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> actually, I was surprised that SCons deletes files before rebuilding them, but that's another discussion
19:16:03 <garyo-home> so can we just say wontfix?
19:16:19 <stevenknight> i'd rather turn it into a feature request for the configurability
19:16:36 <garyo-home> OK, 2.x p3 feature req would be OK by me
19:16:42 <stevenknight> i can go with 2.x
19:16:48 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> done
19:16:55 <stevenknight> on reflection, it is definitely lower priority than other 1.x stuff
19:17:00 <stevenknight> 2119:
19:17:20 <stevenknight> consensus 1.0.x p2
19:17:30 <garyo-home> sure.
19:17:28 <stevenknight> i'm definitely going to fix this soon for my own purposes
19:17:43 <stevenknight> like, tomorrow
19:17:58 <stevenknight> (but not check it into branches/core yet)
19:17:58 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> works for me
19:18:00 <garyo-home> OK.
19:18:11 <stevenknight> okay, on to 2006h2?
19:18:21 <garyo-home> ok, I'm there.
19:18:27 * [GregNoel](GregNoel) has visitors at the door
19:18:34 <garyo-home> 1437, consensus
19:18:49 <stevenknight> yes, 1437 dup
19:18:52 <stevenknight> done
19:18:57 * garyo-home needs a drink, brb
19:19:27 <stevenknight> 1438:
19:19:39 <stevenknight> consensus 1.x p3 me
19:19:46 <stevenknight> i can go w/you guys on the time frame
19:19:58 * stevenknight whistles aimlessly while waiting for everyone else to return...
19:20:06 <garyo-home> hi, I'm back
19:20:18 <garyo-home> 1438 1.x p3 is fine w/ me.
19:20:26 <garyo-home> There's plenty to do before then.
19:20:50 <stevenknight> done
19:21:01 <stevenknight> 1439: i can go w/invalid
19:21:23 <bdbaddog> which spreadsheet are you guys on now?
19:21:24 <stevenknight> i was thinking research because it *is* kind of a pain to hook up new builders
19:21:28 <stevenknight> hey bill
19:21:30 <garyo-home> 1439: and tell him to use src_builder? I guess after this long he probably doesn't care anymore...
19:21:30 <stevenknight> 2006h2
19:21:47 <stevenknight> sure, as a courtesy for closing it out
19:21:48 <bdbaddog> Hey. I'll just be here a few, but I'll add what I can.
19:21:55 <garyo-home> Hi Bill.
19:21:57 <stevenknight> bdbaddog: cool
19:22:19 <stevenknight> so 1439: invalid, point him to src_builder
19:22:35 <garyo-home> re 1439: I'd like a new ticket for making adding src builders easier.
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
19:22:42 <garyo-home> +1
19:22:47 <stevenknight> +1
19:22:58 <bdbaddog> Like AddToCBuilder?
19:23:20 * stevenknight applauds garyo-home's ability to put things much more economically
19:23:31 <garyo-home> bdbaddog: Maybe, but let's not design it now, just make a ticket for later.
19:23:33 <stevenknight> bdbaddog: something like that
19:23:54 <stevenknight> i'd genericize it somehow (wave hands mumble mumble)
19:24:03 <garyo-home> yes.
19:24:12 <bdbaddog> :) yeah. that's probably why it's not done already.
19:24:43 <garyo-home> 1442, folks?
19:24:46 <stevenknight> 1442: sounds like greg's right
19:25:02 <garyo-home> In that case, maybe it's already better due to David's stuff?
19:25:29 <stevenknight> maybe
19:25:33 <garyo-home> Anyone have a mingw env?
19:26:01 <garyo-home> ok, guess not.
19:26:08 <stevenknight> not me
19:26:23 <stevenknight> i really want to set up buildbots with the more common windows configs
19:26:28 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> 1439: concur (I'm back, BTW)
19:26:30 <stevenknight> one for MinGW, one for Cygwin, etc.
19:27:36 <bdbaddog> looks like I have cygwin with mingw-g77 installed.
19:27:48 <stevenknight> the more i think about it, the more 1442 seems like a really interesting case
19:27:57 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> how so?
19:28:04 <stevenknight> conceptually i agree w/Greg's analysis that .f is clearly an error
19:28:21 <stevenknight> but if so, how would you specify the weird corner case where you really *did* want to archive .f files?
19:28:46 <stevenknight> after all, there's no reason why you should be prohibited from doing that
19:29:00 <stevenknight> just because there's a more common use case of .f files generating .o files
19:29:13 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> You need an "ar" builder, not a library builder
19:29:13 <garyo-home> ... or .c files for that matter. Maybe File nodes would do it?
19:29:33 <stevenknight> hmm, interesting distinction
19:29:36 <bdbaddog> doesn mingw builder setup fortran at all?
19:29:44 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> The archive builders take any file suffix
19:30:26 <stevenknight> hmm, i think Gary's right -- File nodes circumvent the suffix checking
19:30:41 <bdbaddog> nope. mingw sets up the following:
19:30:41 <bdbaddog> gnu_tools = ['gcc', 'g++', 'gnulink', 'ar', 'gas', 'm4']
19:30:42 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> you sure?
19:30:49 <stevenknight> nope
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
19:32:02 <garyo-home> It's a pretty atypical case though.
19:32:05 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> Uh, "ar" archives don't have a .a suffix; that's only for libraries.
19:32:30 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> The suffix is usually .ar or none at all
19:32:58 <garyo-home> greg: never seen such a thing myself.
19:33:01 <stevenknight> yeah, the case is atypical
19:33:10 <stevenknight> but i think the potential for confusion remains
19:33:19 <stevenknight> if there is more than one builder that causes "ar" to be invoked
19:33:48 <bdbaddog> has anyone run into a build which used ar for things other than static libraries?
19:33:50 <garyo-home> They could always use Command() if Library() doesn't do what they want.
19:33:51 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> Really? More than one builder causes 'gcc' to be invoked...
19:34:11 <stevenknight> hmm, fair point. i'm probably worrying needlessly
19:34:21 <garyo-home> I think so :-)
19:34:25 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> bdbaddog, you're not old enough; the evolution was the other way around
19:35:04 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> 'ar' was used to build archives; eventually, archives of .o files were acceptable to the linker
19:35:15 <garyo-home> So where does that leave 1442?
19:35:41 <stevenknight> dup
19:35:45 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> dup
19:35:48 <garyo-home> ok.
19:35:56 <bdbaddog> dup of ?
19:36:04 <bdbaddog> mingw builder doesn't setup g77...
19:36:09 <garyo-home> 1437 says the ssheet.
19:36:34 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> That's "better error messages when tool not configured"
19:37:10 <stevenknight> ah, but bill's point is good: our default doesn't even make this possible
19:37:17 <bdbaddog> ahh. o.k. well it's a dup and also it's mingw doesn't setup g77 though.
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.
19:38:20 <garyo-home> There's also 1895, g77 and gfortran not detected on windows which is about mingw.
19:39:21 <garyo-home> Seems like 1442 could be a dup of 1895.
19:39:49 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> (other way around; use the earlier issue as the basis)
19:40:08 <garyo-home> greg: you're right.
19:40:59 <garyo-home> 1895 is research, p3, david. So mark 1895 as dup of 1442, and make 1442 research, p3, david.
19:41:18 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> done; 1443?
19:41:58 <garyo-home> There is now a SHFORTRANFLAGS, so I presume it could get set to /fPIC if appropriate.
19:42:13 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> oops, brb
19:42:36 <garyo-home> But it's clearly David's if it's still broken. 1.0.x p3 David?
19:45:03 <garyo-home> Can we just give 1449 and 1450 to Jim, 1.x p3, keyword "quoting"?
19:45:34 <garyo-home> h'lo?
19:46:06 * sgk_ (n=[stevenkn@c-69-181-234-155.hsd1.ca.comcast.net](mailto:stevenkn@c-69-181-234-155.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)) has joined #scons
19:46:23 <sgk_> hmm, looks like the server i was connected to died
19:46:29 <garyo-home> Hi again, didn't even see you drop out.
19:46:31 <sgk_> what was the last you got from me?
19:46:41 <garyo-home> "our default doesn't even make this possible"
19:47:05 <sgk_> so maybe it's a one liner of 'g77' (or more likely 'gfortran') to the mingw tool list
19:47:26 <sgk_> anyone object to that solution for... 1.x p3?
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."
19:47:53 <garyo-home> If it's trivial, could be in 1.0.x, right?
19:48:00 <sgk_> yeah
19:48:06 <sgk_> 1.0.x p3?
19:48:09 <garyo-home> OK.
19:48:12 <sgk_> done
19:48:19 <garyo-home> Can we just give 1449 and 1450 to Jim, 1.x p3, keyword "quoting"?
19:48:34 <sgk_> +1
19:48:39 <garyo-home> sorry, "research" ?
19:49:02 <garyo-home> research was the ssheet consensus but I kind of think it's 1.x timeframe stuff.
19:49:06 <sgk_> sure, research
19:49:14 <sgk_> research p3 "quoting"
19:49:20 <sgk_> done
19:49:22 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> dkjak
19:49:23 <garyo-home> good.
19:49:30 <sgk_> 1452:
19:49:46 <sgk_> 1.x p3 me
19:49:48 <garyo-home> sounds like that one's yours, Steven.
19:49:58 <garyo-home> ok, done.
19:50:06 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> yes
19:50:15 <sgk_> 1456: research, me "[VisualStudio](VisualStudio)"
19:50:55 <garyo-home> maybe, but I like "invalid" -- can't just have msvc as the *only* tool.
19:51:21 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> true, but a better message would help
19:51:47 <garyo-home> fine, in that case it's dup of the "better errors" one, not [VisualStudio](VisualStudio).
19:51:51 <sgk_> oh, hey, even better
19:52:04 <sgk_> that makes it a toolchain issue and i can give it to you guys... :-)
19:52:18 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> that's why I said dup 1437, better messages
19:52:20 <sgk_> invalid is good, though
19:52:31 <sgk_> either one is fine w/me
19:52:41 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> Let's go with dup
19:52:53 <garyo-home> Yes, that gives the OP more info.
19:53:00 <sgk_> ok, dup 1437
19:53:03 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> done
19:53:23 <sgk_> 1458: dup 1437 as well
19:53:24 <garyo-home> 1458, same.
19:53:27 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> yes
19:53:54 <garyo-home> 1459, does Ludwig have a prototype of this already?
19:53:55 <sgk_> 1459: Ludwig
19:54:10 <garyo-home> +1
19:54:18 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> He was looking at it; I think he has an idea
19:54:44 <garyo-home> Good.
19:54:44 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> His experiments showed very little impact due to the size of buffer
19:54:54 * stevenknight has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
19:55:12 <sgk_> Ludwig, any appropriate target milestone + priority
19:55:18 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> done
19:55:59 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> 1460
19:56:00 <sgk_> 1460: i'm agnostic
19:56:20 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> interesting choice of word...
19:56:50 <garyo-home> I can take it. Any time; 1.0.x p3?
19:56:56 <sgk_> works for me
19:57:07 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> works
19:57:09 <garyo-home> ok.
19:57:22 <sgk_> 1462: worksforme
19:57:26 <sgk_> i'm a dual core
19:57:39 <sgk_> it can be re-opened if it's still a problem elsewhere
19:57:40 <garyo-home> Sounds like you tried pretty hard to repro it.
19:57:48 <garyo-home> worksforme works for me.
19:57:50 <sgk_> but my guess is some of Benoit's Taskmaster changes have fixed it
19:57:53 <sgk_> :-)
19:58:11 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> That would be my guess as well
19:58:26 <garyo-home> 1464: agree, wontfix.
19:58:33 <sgk_> done
19:58:46 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> done
19:58:58 <sgk_> 1466: me, research, [VisualStudio](VisualStudio)
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
19:59:14 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> OK, worst case you toss it to us.
19:59:21 <sgk_> yes
19:59:33 <garyo-home> ok.
19:59:40 <sgk_> 1468: 1.0.x p2?
19:59:57 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> at least
20:00:02 <sgk_> sounds pretty serious
20:00:15 <garyo-home> People must be working around it.
20:00:26 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> working by blind luck is another way of saying pretty serious...
20:00:33 <sgk_> yeah
20:00:37 <sgk_> 1.0.x p1?
20:00:43 <garyo-home> ok w/ me.
20:00:48 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> yes
20:00:52 <sgk_> done
20:01:21 <sgk_> 1469: d'oh! wonfix
20:01:24 <sgk_> wontfix
20:01:25 <sgk_> greg is right
20:01:32 <garyo-home> agreed.
20:01:36 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> done
20:01:41 <sgk_> 1471: closed
20:01:43 <sgk_> 1476:
20:01:57 <sgk_> research, me
20:02:13 <sgk_> (sorry, trying to get through these quick, I have to start winding down)
20:02:30 <sgk_> 1478: research, me, [VisualStudio](VisualStudio)
20:02:34 <garyo-home> Me too. OK, 1476 is yours.
20:02:48 <sgk_> 1478: gary, fixed?
20:02:48 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> 1476: you're welcome to it
20:02:53 <sgk_> 1483: gary, fixed?
20:03:05 <garyo-home> 1478: hopefully will be overtaken by vsvars.bat stuff
20:03:31 <sgk_> yes re: 1478 & vsvars.bat
20:03:51 <sgk_> 1488: 1.x p3 me
20:04:07 <garyo-home> 1483: yes, I consider that fixed.
20:04:44 <sgk_> cool
20:04:49 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> Now would be a good time for me to quit; our guests are watching the football game...
20:05:01 <garyo-home> I should go too. Next week?
20:05:03 <sgk_> and i have a dog that needs walking and won't wait
20:05:09 <sgk_> same time?
20:05:13 <garyo-home> OK for me.
20:05:17 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> done
20:05:23 <[GregNoel](GregNoel)> later, all...
20:05:24 <garyo-home> good, bye for now!
20:05:28 <sgk_> done (and i'll remember Monday night this time...)
20:05:29 <sgk_> later..
20:05:36 * sgk_ has quit ("Leaving")
20:05:45 * garyo-home has quit ("[ChatZilla](ChatZilla) 0.9.83 [Firefox 3.0/2008052906]")