Re: [PATCH] Re: serious doubts about waf

[John Mandereau]

Le mercredi 11 novembre 2009 à 23:36 +0000, Graham Percival a écrit :
> Hmm.  I don't completely follow, but does this explain why waf
> always succeeds on the second attempt?  If not, it might be
> something weirder... but then again, if you're following it up on
> the waf-user list, then it's no longer my concern.

I can't answer your question, because I haven't worked out the order Waf
executes code, especially what code is called when reading the wscripts
and what code is called when actually building.


> I'll check it out tomorrow.  If it works, I'll spend another few
> hours on waf -- particularly, trying out things that are more
> likely to fail.

If it wasn't likely to be true, I'd suspect some sarcasm here :-)


> If you're willing to follow up on any more cases like this, then I
> think I'll be willing to keep on waffing.

This means being almost completely idle on the academic side (because
learning Italian and new math tools already takes much time), but as my
PhD starts in January I feel like I can afford going for it; it will
make me more aware of Waf code than be productive on wscripts for
LilyPond, but this seems necessary to make those maoing wscripts
actually work.

Best,
John

signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée