Author Topic: Scons as custom makefile problem  (Read 2464 times)

Thorris

  • Guest
Scons as custom makefile problem
« on: September 16, 2006, 09:31:06 pm »
Hello,

I'm using Scons through the custum makefile option to build a project. Recently this stopped to work. When I try to compile the project codeblocks complains about a missing separator. I don't remember the moment it stopped to work. By the way, I use the latest nightly builds.

Error message:
SConstruct:1: *** missing separator.  Stop.
Process terminated with status 2 (0 minutes, 1 seconds)
1 errors, 0 warnings

I heard that there were some changes. Any clues what can cause this.

Thanks, Thorris.

Offline mandrav

  • Project Leader
  • Administrator
  • Lives here!
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
    • Code::Blocks IDE
Re: Scons as custom makefile problem
« Reply #1 on: September 16, 2006, 09:49:17 pm »
I am not saying it's not a C::B bug (Makefile-based projects are not tested with virtual targets), but this looks like a SCons error...
Be patient!
This bug will be fixed soon...

Thorris

  • Guest
Re: Scons as custom makefile problem
« Reply #2 on: September 17, 2006, 12:18:00 pm »
Hello,

I don't think it's a problem with Scons, since the SConstruct file has not been changed. On my laptop I run an older codeblocks version and it works with the same SConstruct file. Furthermore it works from the command line.

I wonder why codeblocks even processes the custom makefile, since that shouldn't be necessary.

Ciao, Thorris.

Offline yop

  • Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 387
Re: Scons as custom makefile problem
« Reply #3 on: September 17, 2006, 09:34:28 pm »
It doesn't process the Makefile. Why would you think it did? It only takes your custom build commands and runs them. Check these out they might be screwed up and codeblocks tries to run scons on a non existing file or something. Also since the virtual targets addition if you try to build a virtual target cb will try to only build your first target using your custom make target command. Yianni I 'll place a bug report on this one since my guess is that this is the case (again ;))
Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code.