[Scons-users] Caching and variant_dir

[Dirk Bächle]

Hi Glen,

On 20.11.2015 20:45, Glen Gibb wrote:
> Hi William,
>
> I had come across that answer on StackOverflow before posting to the list. I do have the same problem that Brady (the StackOverflow
> poster) had.
>
> Brady states at the end of his reply:
>
>     The fact that SCons places the compiled object file in the source directory seems like a bug to me. At the very least, it should
>     be placed in the variant_dir root directory.
>
> This is the exact same problem that I have, and I tend to agree with Brady that the compiled object should be placed in the variant_dir.
>

it's not placed under the variant_dir because the top-level folder (where the C file is "mounted" to, via the Repository call) isn't 
linked to the "build" output directory...but the "src" folder is. So, consequently the files in "src" get resolved from within the 
"build" folder and their object files can be built to this location.
The "ext.c" is built in the folder where its source file is found.

> Do you know if there are any intentions by the developers to address this?
>

 From my point of view, SCons operates exactly as it should and as the MAN page and the UserGuide describe. So, I currently don't 
see a need to amend the functionalities of either "variant_dir" or "Repository".
As is described in the mentioned StackOverflow Q&A

>
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 11:20 AM, William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com <mailto:wblevins001 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Here is feedback from one of the project managers for a related questions:
>     http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10209961/source-code-compiled-from-a-repository-is-not-put-in-the-variant-dir-for-a-hie
>

you get the output you want, if you move the files in your external_project folder one hierarchy lower into their own "src" 
subdirectory.

Best regards,

Dirk