[Scons-users] Dependency cycles. 2.4.1 -> 2.5.1

[William Blevins]

Yes, if pre-2.5.0 SCons was not creating implicit dependencies for the
generated files. If the 2.4.x tree doesn't show any dependencies for your
headers, then this is why you never got dependency cycles previously even
though the cycles did exist.

How are they being created?

On Jan 6, 2017 11:44 AM, "Pierre-Luc Boily" <pierreluc.boily at gmail.com>
wrote:

> What I had in mind when I wrote that I can`t generate tree with 2.5.1 is
> because 2.5.1 output many cycle dependency problems Then, it seems normal
> to
> me that no tree can be generated with such problem.
>
> Do you think that this "cross-language implicit dependency support" added
> in
> 2.5.0 could lead to my cycle dependency problems, although all my files
> involved in the error log are c++ files?
>
> And do you think that the mutual dependency I found in my tree (2.4.1)
> could
> lead to problems with 2.5.1?
>
> thx a lot for your time.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://scons.1086193.n5.
> nabble.com/Dependency-cycles-2-4-1-2-5-1-tp40926p40931.html
> Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> Scons-users mailing list
> Scons-users at scons.org
> https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist4.pair.net/pipermail/scons-users/attachments/20170106/c336c1d3/attachment.html>