On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 16:22:35 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Monday, August 23, 2010 13:16:38 Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:39:50 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > i'm not sure caching the value and using it in between runs is a
> > > good idea. unless you also cache the thing you're caching and
> > > compare it to make sure your cache is no longer invalid.
> > >
> > > i.e. export _SCONSOPTS_MAKEOPTS=${MAKEOPTS}, and then on every
> > > escons invocation, make sure ${MAKEOPTS} hasnt changed in which
> > > case you need to regenerate it. or just avoid the cache
> > > altogether and leave SCONSOPTS as a hook specific to scons.
> >
> > Can do, though I don't see a reason why anyone would mangle
> > MAKEOPTS in a middle of an ebuild using SCons.
>
> i agree, but you might as have it work properly in all cases instead
> of flaking out randomly on ebuild authors.
We're hitting another corner case then. What if user modifies SCONSOPTS
in the middle of an ebuild? We could export another variable keeping
resulting SCONSOPTS and comparing it with the current SCONSOPTS -- but
what if the ebuild author randomly hit the same flags that resulted
from MAKEOPTS->SCONSOPTS conversion (and changed MAKEOPTS at the same
time)?
If we consider it like that, we end up with the idea that re-generating
SCONSOPTS every time escons() is called is the only feasible solution
-- but I don't really think it is worth to waste the time considering
it.
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://mgorny.alt.pl>
<xmpp:mgo...@jabber.ru>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
