[Scons-dev] Cross-language support
Bill Deegan
bill at baddogconsulting.com
Sun Aug 9 01:16:37 EDT 2015
William,
That's fine if you want to make an environment per file you're evaluating.
If you have the SCANNER_HINT, then you can add it to a builder (which
creates and OverrideEnvironment(If I remember correctly)) and simplifies
the SConstruct/script
-Bill
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:29 PM, William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
wrote:
> I was rethinking the whole SCANNER_HINIT concept, and realized that its
> unnecessary because what we are trying to accomplish can already be done
> via "env.add_scanner( <empty string>, <Scanner> )", so unless someone
> objects, I plan to remove that bit of functionality.
>
> V/R,
> William
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 8:37 PM, William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Jason,
>>
>> That test is indeed expecting the behavior we a trying to eliminate. I
>> am curious as to why this happened previously with IDL, but not with other
>> languages, but perhaps it doesn't matter.
>>
>> With the change to make Install non-recursive, my tests failures look
>> like
>> https://bitbucket.org/scons/scons/pull-requests/237/issue-2264-cross-language-scanner-support/diff#comment-8529830
>> with only 3 tests failing. The other two expect to be able to compile c++
>> code from installed targets. I'm not sure if this is a documented
>> functionality of SCons, but it's scary because of how include paths would
>> work in those cases.
>>
>> On a related note, if we change the Install scanner, then we may also
>> need to write a test for calling "scons install" and expecting all
>> dependencies to be built. This case may or may not be already covered
>> within the SCons test cases.
>>
>> V/R,
>> William
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi william,
>>>
>>> Trying to take a little time to code. I am looking at the IDL case you
>>> talked about. I applied the non-reclusive scanner and test/IDL/IDLSUFFIXES.py
>>> test fails because it fails to copy over the idl file when the .h file
>>> changed. However from what I can tell this is the opposite behavior we
>>> would want and in this case I really think, given the patch to not be
>>> recursive on install builder is the correct thing we want to do. I think
>>> this test should be changed to not want the .h file to cause a recopy. This
>>> would match the same logic we would have with the CPPSUFFIX test.
>>>
>>> However after I am unclear about the test as is. I would think given
>>> what I have done with IDL files in the past, that one would not want the
>>> copy logic as it in this test as the installed files would fail to work as
>>> the “dependent” .h files is not copied as well. Given this I think this
>>> might have been a mistake in the original test logic that was not intended
>>> to show that it is working or not.
>>>
>>> as a note given the fix for the install as it is... I still have these
>>> failures:
>>>
>>> Failed the following 15 tests:
>>> test\Batch\action-changed.py
>>> test\IDL\IDLSUFFIXES.py
>>> test\MSVS\vs-9.0-exec.py
>>> test\Win32\mingw.py
>>> test\exitfns.py
>>> test\explain\basic.py
>>> test\explain\save-info.py
>>> test\implicit\IMPLICIT_COMMAND_DEPENDENCIES.py
>>> test\import.py
>>> test\long-lines\signature.py
>>> test\scons-time\run\config\python.py
>>> test\scons-time\run\option\python.py
>>> test\sconsign\script\SConsignFile.py
>>> test\sconsign\script\Signatures.py
>>> test\sconsign\script\no-SConsignFile.py
>>>
>>> which just says given what is here D and C Suffix test are now passing
>>> and the other tests at the moment seem to fail most for me in the default
>>> branch of SCons ie I have these failures with the latest tip
>>>
>>> Failed the following 12 tests:
>>> test\Batch\action-changed.py
>>> test\MSVS\vs-9.0-exec.py
>>> test\Win32\mingw.py
>>> test\exitfns.py
>>> test\implicit\IMPLICIT_COMMAND_DEPENDENCIES.py
>>> test\import.py
>>> test\long-lines\signature.py
>>> test\scons-time\run\config\python.py
>>> test\scons-time\run\option\python.py
>>> test\sconsign\script\SConsignFile.py
>>> test\sconsign\script\Signatures.py
>>> test\sconsign\script\no-SConsignFile.py
>>>
>>> I have to look into what is happening.
>>>
>>> Jason
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 29, 2015 9:56 PM
>>> *To:* SCons developer list <scons-dev at scons.org>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support
>>>
>>> OK
>>>
>>> I think we agree case 4 is best. Let me look at the idl test case. I am
>>> not sure what this would be an issue with the installer builder at the
>>> moment.
>>>
>>> Jason
>>>
>>> *From:* William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 29, 2015 9:50 PM
>>> *To:* SCons developer list <scons-dev at scons.org>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:05 PM, Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ya I see this...
>>>>
>>>> So I trying to take a little time tonight and figure out what happens..
>>>> Could use some help.
>>>>
>>>> I currently looking at test/CPPSUFFIXES.py
>>>>
>>>> This fails at line 107. From what I can tell the test expects output of
>>>>
>>>> C:\Python27\python.exe mycc.py test1.o test1.c
>>>>
>>>> but instead we get
>>>>
>>>> C:\Python27\python.exe mycc.py test1.o test1.c
>>>> Install file: "test1.c" as "test1_c"
>>>> Install file: "test1.h" as "test1_h"
>>>>
>>>> This happens because foo.h was changed causing these files to be copied
>>>> again.
>>>>
>>>> So problems I have with this test.
>>>>
>>>> 1) no one would copy headers that depend on a header not passed to the
>>>> install area. I am not sure if we should treat <> different from “”
>>>> includes. It a common practice to use “” for headers in your library and <>
>>>> for stuff outside your library. I don’t this really helps either way
>>>> 2) the copy/install builder does not generate new file if the source is
>>>> different. What we have here is a good scanner that would do the right
>>>> thing if the “binary” needs to be rebuilt, but redundant is the copy has to
>>>> happen.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Gary and I were of the same opinion. The functionality is correct and
>>> matches all other scanner/builder behavior, but it is inefficient...
>>>
>>>
>>>> The issue in a way is that SCons makes the installed test1_c out of
>>>> date because foo.h is out of date, when in fact this is a case in which we
>>>> would want to update logic to care more about the csig of the source being
>>>> the same as what is stored and not doing anything as technically this is
>>>> correct behavior for copy like builders and ignoring that the scanner
>>>> header is out of date.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I see few solutions to this:
>>>>
>>>> 1) we say current behavior is correct and update the test.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is the easiest, but I was hoping to resolve this performance
>>> issue.
>>>
>>>
>>>> 2) we make a change to allow a install/copy builder to say the scanner
>>>> items are Required() which remove the Depends() state
>>>>
>>>
>>> I looked into doing this, but I didn't see an easy way to do this. I
>>> made some notes:
>>> https://bitbucket.org/scons/scons/pull-requests/237/issue-2264-cross-language-scanner-support/diff#comment-8502930
>>>
>>>
>>>> 3) we change builder to apply a custom sig check for the install nodes
>>>> to ignore that a file dependent from the scanner.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This seems like a reasonable approach unless this means updating every
>>> scanner. The fundamental problem here is that language scanners already
>>> exist that exhibit correct behavior. I don't want to duplicate any part of
>>> the scanner code. I feel like going this route will require some level of
>>> duplication.
>>>
>>>
>>>> 4) remove the scanner from the install builder as we only want to copy
>>>> files that change
>>>>
>>>
>>> I assume this is functional equivalent to disabling recursive scanning
>>> in the install builder. I already considered this and think its the best
>>> choice. See some notes here about our previous conversation:
>>> https://bitbucket.org/scons/scons/pull-requests/237/issue-2264-cross-language-scanner-support/diff#comment-8521558
>>>
>>> With that change only 3 tests are left failing for me. See copa-pasta
>>> snippet below:
>>>
>>> test/IDL/IDLSUFFIXES.py # If I understand the test correctly, this test checks to see that the bug we are trying to fix works???
>>> test/explain/basic.py # Contains code with build dependencies on installed files as sources: is this something SCons explicitly supports?
>>> test/explain/save-info.py # Contains code with build dependencies on installed files as sources: is this something SCons explicitly supports?
>>>
>>> Please pay special attention to test/IDL/IDLSIFFIXES.py because this
>>> test requires the recursive scanner behavior to work which leads me to
>>> believe that the recursive scanner problem already existed, and there used
>>> to be a hack for this with the CScanner...
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I lean toward 4) logic given I how I understand the CCopy builder in
>>>> Parts works. and that the install builder for the most part is a copy
>>>> builder that adds nodes to a list to be used by the Scons version of the
>>>> packaging builders.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Agreed. See above.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:19 PM
>>>> *To:* SCons developer list <scons-dev at scons.org>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support
>>>>
>>>> Jason.
>>>>
>>>> FYI. The failing tests you listed match the list from June. The
>>>> action-test.py may be new.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://bitbucket.org/scons/scons/pull-requests/237/issue-2264-cross-language-scanner-support/diff#comment-7323143
>>>>
>>>> V/R,
>>>> William
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 8:16 PM, William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jason,
>>>>>
>>>>> As previously stated in the pull request comments, I expect some tests
>>>>> to fail currently because of the recursive header install issue (topic #1):
>>>>> <lang>SUFFIXES, HeaderInstall.py. The other tests may or may not be
>>>>> related.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is more value in looking at those tests first. It may also be
>>>>> valuable to go back 3-4 commits to the closest ancestor of the default
>>>>> branch and run tests there, so that we can see if some of the tests failed
>>>>> previously. Also, if we think its a problem of the current location of
>>>>> that divergent head, then we can see if a rebase fixes some of them.
>>>>>
>>>>> V/R,
>>>>> William
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ok not any better...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Failed the following 16 tests:
>>>>>> test\Batch\action-changed.py
>>>>>> test\CPPSUFFIXES.py
>>>>>> test\DSUFFIXES.py
>>>>>> test\Fortran\FORTRANSUFFIXES.py
>>>>>> test\HeaderInstall.py
>>>>>> test\MSVS\vs-9.0-exec.py
>>>>>> test\Win32\mingw.py
>>>>>> test\exitfns.py
>>>>>> test\implicit\IMPLICIT_COMMAND_DEPENDENCIES.py
>>>>>> test\import.py
>>>>>> test\long-lines\signature.py
>>>>>> test\scons-time\run\config\python.py
>>>>>> test\scons-time\run\option\python.py
>>>>>> test\sconsign\script\SConsignFile.py
>>>>>> test\sconsign\script\Signatures.py
>>>>>> test\sconsign\script\no-SConsignFile.py
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would need to dig down to see what is failing and why
>>>>>> Jason
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com>
>>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 29, 2015 5:38 PM
>>>>>> *To:* SCons developer list <scons-dev at scons.org>
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ok I have it fixed... I am rerunning the tests now
>>>>>> Jason
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com>
>>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 29, 2015 5:30 PM
>>>>>> *To:* SCons developer list <scons-dev at scons.org>
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I must have messed up. I only see debugCount and JniHeaderDir
>>>>>> bookmarks at the moment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jason
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 29, 2015 4:50 PM
>>>>>> *To:* SCons developer list <scons-dev at scons.org>
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's a SCons fork. Not an HG branch (in case its a terminology
>>>>>> problem). Make sure you are using the CrossLanguage bookmark.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> V/R,
>>>>>> William
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> branch *SCons_20150323 *
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can will setup from scratch again and try again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jason
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *From:* William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 29, 2015 4:38 PM
>>>>>>> *To:* SCons developer list <scons-dev at scons.org>
>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jason,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are you sure you are using the correct commit revision?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> None of those tests are failing on my Linux distro, and I haven't
>>>>>>> modified any of those tests either. Plus, tests that I am expecting to
>>>>>>> fail are apparently passing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> V/R,
>>>>>>> William
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So a quick pass of the tests has these failures
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Failed the following 15 tests:
>>>>>>>> test\Batch\action-changed.py
>>>>>>>> test\MSVS\vs-9.0-exec.py
>>>>>>>> test\Win32\mingw.py
>>>>>>>> test\exitfns.py
>>>>>>>> test\implicit\IMPLICIT_COMMAND_DEPENDENCIES.py
>>>>>>>> test\import.py
>>>>>>>> test\long-lines\signature.py
>>>>>>>> test\option\debug-count.py
>>>>>>>> test\option\debug-multiple.py
>>>>>>>> test\option\debug-objects.py
>>>>>>>> test\scons-time\run\config\python.py
>>>>>>>> test\scons-time\run\option\python.py
>>>>>>>> test\sconsign\script\SConsignFile.py
>>>>>>>> test\sconsign\script\Signatures.py
>>>>>>>> test\sconsign\script\no-SConsignFile.py
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *From:* Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com>
>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 29, 2015 2:32 PM
>>>>>>>> *To:* SCons developer list <scons-dev at scons.org>
>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ok let me update the branch and re-run everything.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jason
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *From:* William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 29, 2015 10:30 AM
>>>>>>>> *To:* SCons developer list <scons-dev at scons.org>
>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jason,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure. I remember that you were helping me look into the
>>>>>>>> recursive Install behavior. Plus, possible parts incompatibility?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I haven't ran the tests on a windows box at all. I don't expect
>>>>>>>> anything new, but it should be done before it ships :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> V/R,
>>>>>>>> William
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Which MS toolchain on windows do we need tested? I can do a test
>>>>>>>>> run this afternoon.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jason
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *From:* William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 29, 2015 1:11 AM
>>>>>>>>> *To:* SCons developer list <scons-dev at scons.org>
>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Happy with it*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Until the review is complete, and I can perhaps get a few more
>>>>>>>>> guinea pigs to try it out, it's hard to make a concrete projection. I have
>>>>>>>>> 3 items listed out that need to be given a thumbs up/down at a minimum:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> * Item #1 is still mostly outstanding. I'm not sure how to
>>>>>>>>> address, please see the discussion Jason and I started a few weeks ago
>>>>>>>>> under the pull request comments.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> * Item #2 requires no changes (to my knowledge), but someone with
>>>>>>>>> more QT knowledge may say otherwise.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> * I may already have most of the patch for Item #3 (IE. no scanner
>>>>>>>>> for key) based on today's feedback.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I also still need to request test runs on Windows, and for
>>>>>>>>> toolchains that I may not have installed or instructions to install them
>>>>>>>>> (EG. D).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> V/R,
>>>>>>>>> William
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 1:58 AM, William Blevins <
>>>>>>>>> wblevins001 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As soon as we are happen with it :)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:30 AM, Bill Deegan <
>>>>>>>>>> bill at baddogconsulting.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> O.k. let me push 2.3.5 with the visual studio 2015 stuff.
>>>>>>>>>>> Then we'll changed to 2.4 merge slots. stabilize. release.
>>>>>>>>>>> Then this code? (2.5?)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -Bill
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com
>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have been using the slots drop for a while with Parts. I
>>>>>>>>>>>> think it is ready. It does have a notable improvement in speed and memory
>>>>>>>>>>>> size. I would before getting this out as officially earlier than later.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jason
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> *From:* William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 28, 2015 8:31 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>> *To:* Dirk Bächle <dl9obn at darc.de> ; SCons developer list
>>>>>>>>>>>> <scons-dev at scons.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 7:16 PM, Dirk Bächle <tshortik at gmx.de>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> sorry for chiming in so late.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 28.07.2015 23:44, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, that's how we've done it in the past. Sounds like doing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it at the same time as slots would be perfect.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Doing this in parallel with the "slots" change sounds good to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> me too. +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not opposed to releasing in the same update as slots, but
>>>>>>>>>>>> since the cross language code reviews haven't been finished, I don't want
>>>>>>>>>>>> to delay slots since it is ready now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The pessimist in me as sees doing two major enhancements in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> same release as higher risk; I don't foresee any issues, but its worth the
>>>>>>>>>>>> thought if the release overhead isn't too bad.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Gary
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Bill Deegan <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bill at baddogconsulting.com <mailto:bill at baddogconsulting.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gary,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For such a change we should bump the second digit?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.4?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree we should not turn down a change because it will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cause rebuilds where the past didn't as long as it is now more correct
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (which it should be with this change).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, "forward" is the way to go. ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also agree we should be verbose in our notification of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impacts of the new change to avoid (as much as we can) "surprises".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think (better: hope) we did a good enough job for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "slots" stuff on this. For the scanner changes, I see them more like a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix...so a single announcement should be sufficient?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Finally, and just in case I haven't done so already, I'd like
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to thank William for all the work he's done on this issue. I couldn't help
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as much as I would've liked, but with Gary's support you tackled this down
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and brought it to a good end. Kudos to you...bravo!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Truly appreciated. I have spent a lot of time on this issue
>>>>>>>>>>>> despite what one might expect from the number of lines of code.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It was honestly my first time working in a "real" python
>>>>>>>>>>>> environment outside of scripting, and the SCons code base is rather
>>>>>>>>>>>> complex. It instills me greater appreciation for the work that has already
>>>>>>>>>>>> done.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I also want to thank everyone here for their help past and
>>>>>>>>>>>> future, but don't pat me on the back until its done. I might get lazy :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dirk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev at scons.org
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20150808/72860376/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Scons-dev
mailing list