Re: Command Dependecies broken

Any news on this problem? Any high profile cons developer/maintainer
planning to look at it?

TTimo

On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 14:27:26 -0400
Steven Allen <[email protected]> wrote:

> This seems to be a pretty fundumental cons problem to me.  With this
> dependecy bug, cons 2.3 is unusable, in my opinion.
> 
> It seems to boil down to the use of "content signatures" and "build
> signatures", which was introduced in cons 2.3.  Does any one know what the
> goal was in splitting the 2.2 "signature" into these two pieces?  What it
> run time speed? (i.e an attempt to not spend so much time generated Md5
> signatures?)  If so, do you know what the two signatures are used for and
> when?    
> 
> I made a brief attempt at repair this bug, but without knowing what the goal
> was, it's kinda hard to decide what to do.  Reverting all signatures to just
> the full signature causes everything to rebuild all the time.
> 
> SteveA
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Timothee Besset [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Friday, June 28, 2002 4:41 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Command Dependecies broken
> 
> 
> It's very likely that the problems I reported about AfterBuild being broken
> in earlier emails are related to that same bug.
> 
> TTimo
> 
> On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 10:19:51 +0200 (MEST)
> Johan Holmberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Steven Allen wrote:
> > >
> > > Now I could imagine that cons thinks this is a itermediate file and 
> > > it doesn't need to be rebuilt, but it really isn't in this case.  I 
> > > couldn't find anything in the man pages/FAQ stating that 
> > > intermediate files are not rebuilt. And if I say "cons foo.2", then 
> > > it is no longer an intermediate file... It is a target, and the the 
> > > target has changed!!!!
> > >
> > 
> > Another alarming example is (using 2.3.0 or the latest CVS):
> > 
> >        $ emacs foo.cpp       # change the source file
> >        $ cons foo
> >        cc -c foo.cpp -o foo.o
> >        cc -o foo foo.o
> >        $
> >        $ cp foo.cpp foo      # or any other change to the target
> >        $ cons foo
> >        cons.pl: "foo" is up-to-date.
> >        $
> > 
> > I had no idea that the 2.3.0 (and later) version was so totally 
> > broken.
> > 
> > (I have never used it regurlary)
> > 
> > /Johan Holmberg
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > [email protected] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/cons-discuss
> > Cons URL: http://www.dsmit.com/cons/
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> [email protected] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/cons-discuss
> Cons URL: http://www.dsmit.com/cons/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> [email protected]
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/cons-discuss
> Cons URL: http://www.dsmit.com/cons/
> 

_______________________________________________
[email protected]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/cons-discuss
Cons URL: http://www.dsmit.com/cons/