We could also say the same about the target values. I believe that is in the stuff that get a signature as well
Jason -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of William Deegan Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 2:03 PM To: Tom Tanner; SCons developer list Subject: Re: [Scons-dev] debugging signatures Tom, If order of your sources is important then it's important to store it in the signature. If not, then it probably isn't. -Bill On Sep 21, 2012, at 9:11 AM, Tom Tanner (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <[email protected]> wrote: > So if you ${SOURCES} the names of all the sources go in the signature > calculation? even though they're already dependencies anyway? So I should > really do $( ${SOURCES} $) in my situation? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: [email protected] > To: TOM TANNER (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON), [email protected] > At: Sep 21 2012 13:11:18 > > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Tom Tanner (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) > <[email protected]> wrote: >> But thats referring to $( $) not ${ $}. I think it'd be wrong to put >> the sources in the signature calculation as they are probably already >> in the dependencies, but I don't know if it does or doesn't > > Bill's right. ${...$} does variable substitution, just like $FOO. > The result of that substitution goes into the signature. Everything > except what's in $(...$) goes in. > > -- > Gary > > _______________________________________________ > Scons-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev _______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list [email protected] http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev _______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list [email protected] http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
