[Scons-dev] please try latest default branch

[Gary Oberbrunner]

Are you saying 2.3.0 was fine but 2.3.1 rebuilds needlessly? Or is this
something that was there in 2.3.0?

-- 
Gary Oberbrunner
(sent from my Android)
On Jan 10, 2014 12:56 PM, "Kenny, Jason L" <jason.l.kenny at intel.com> wrote:


>  I have the same issue with the build at my job. I thought it might have

> been bug in Parts passing data around, a badly define build files that

> dependson stuff differently if something exists on disk or not ( ie

> something that is built). However I pretty sure there is a bug in SCons. I

> leaning towards bugs in way signatures are made.. honestly this is where I

> go bad to needing to refactor scons. The plus side it seems to happen for

> me only on one or two cases out of 90k different outputs for the build.

> Parts tends to get around this when it skips loading the Parts file that

> defines these nodes as for some reason the corruption seems to happen when

> the build file happens, the existing stored state seems to be correct.

>

>

>

> Jason

>

>

>

> *From:* scons-dev-bounces at scons.org [mailto:scons-dev-bounces at scons.org] *On

> Behalf Of *Gary Oberbrunner

> *Sent:* Thursday, January 09, 2014 5:08 PM

> *To:* Dirk Baechle; SCons developer list

> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] please try latest default branch

>

>

>

> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Dirk Bächle <tshortik at gmx.de> wrote:

>

>   On 09.01.2014 21:16, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:

>

>

>

> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Dirk Bächle <tshortik at gmx.de> wrote:

>

>  On 09.01.2014 14:55, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:

>

> I'm also getting some spurious rebuilds with 2.3.1 compared with 2.3.0.

>  Will dig into it.  Dirk, I'm not sure if it's your patch or something else

> that changed....

>

>

> I created a pull request, switching off the memory savings for the

> Interactive mode completely. Just to be extra careful...

>

> With this, we should get rid of the observed problems.

>

>

>

> I'm not using interactive mode.  This is just regular repeated builds.

>

>  Oh, I see. Do you have something like a series of steps for reproducing

> the error(s)?

>

>

>

> No, sorry; it happens on my day-job project which is huge and proprietary.

>  I did spend some time on it today but scons just says it's rebuilding for

> an unknown reason.  I suspect (?) it might have something to do with a dir

> as a source.

>

>

>

> --

>

> Gary

>

> _______________________________________________

> Scons-dev mailing list

> Scons-dev at scons.org

> http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

>

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://two.pairlist.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20140110/711a5a0a/attachment.htm>