----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/604/#review1012 -----------------------------------------------------------
SConstruct <http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/604/#comment1381> Why did you get rid of the validators? My recollection is that a typo in EXTRAS can be baffling. - Nathan On 2011-03-24 08:11:13, Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/604/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated 2011-03-24 08:11:13) > > > Review request for Default, Ali Saidi, Gabe Black, Steve Reinhardt, and > Nathan Binkert. > > > Summary > ------- > > scons: interpret paths relative to launch directory > > Make sure all command-line targets and EXTRAS directories > are interpreted relative to the launch directory. This > turns out to be very useful when building code from an > EXTRAS directory using SCons's -C option. > > We were trying to do this with targets but it didn't actually > work since we didn't update BUILD_TARGETS (so SCons got > confused internally). We weren't even trying with EXTRAS. > > To simplify the code, the default target is also interpreted > relative to the launch dir even though it was explicitly > handled as relative to the m5 dir before... I doubt anyone > really uses this anyway so it didn't seem worth the complexity. > (Maybe we should get rid of it?) > > > Diffs > ----- > > SConstruct 89cd8302abd3 > > Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/604/diff > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Steve > > _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
