Bugzilla – Bug 855
waf dies badly when switching from debug to optimized build or vice versa
Last modified: 2010-04-23 10:47:18 EDT
Created attachment 806 [details] waf traceback Steps to reproduce: 0) Take a clean working copy 1) ./waf configure -d debug 2) ./waf build 3) ./waf configure -d optimized 4) ./waf build Then waf dies with exception TypeError: argument of type 'int' is not iterable. The full traceback is in attachment. Mercurial revision is b920710704c9. The current workaround is to add "./waf distclean" after step 2). This bug really annoys me, as I have to switch frequently between debug/optimized/release builds. Also this bug is probably an upstream (waf) bug, but I think, it should be kept here as a tracker anyway.
(In reply to comment #0) > Mercurial revision is b920710704c9. Looks like revision 93a684517ead is not affected. It seems, that changeset d6c026abfb3f (waf upgrade from 1.5.11 to 1.5.13) broke the things.
(In reply to comment #1) Looks like, the bug is fixed with upstream changeset 7524 [1]. So it must be working in coming waf-1.5.16. [1] http://code.google.com/p/waf/source/detail?spec=svn7540&r=7524
(In reply to comment #2) > So it must be working in coming waf-1.5.16. waf-1.5.16 released.
(In reply to comment #3) > waf-1.5.16 released. Seems to be blocked by waf's issue 658 [1]. [1] http://code.google.com/p/waf/issues/detail?id=658
(In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > waf-1.5.16 released. > > Seems to be blocked by waf's issue 658 [1]. > > [1] http://code.google.com/p/waf/issues/detail?id=658 This bug probably deserves a higher status and possibly a tutorial update if we can't fix it soon. The tutorial has a new user go through the process of reconfiguring for optimized and rebuilding. This will fail on them :(
(In reply to comment #5) > This bug probably deserves a higher status and possibly a tutorial update if we > can't fix it soon. The tutorial has a new user go through the process of > reconfiguring for optimized and rebuilding. This will fail on them :( 1) Well, upgrading waf after RC1 isn't an option, I suppose. 2) Repacking current waf version with a little change isn't good too, though isn't so dangerous. 3) Adding some words to the documentation seems to be the safest way, though may add some complexity. I'd prefer option 3) with this bug to be a reminder to change documentation back after actial bug fix.
(In reply to comment #4) > Seems to be blocked by waf's issue 658 [1]. > > [1] http://code.google.com/p/waf/issues/detail?id=658 Fixed in waf changesets 7682 and 7683, so waiting for waf-1.5.17. Currently testing waf's revision 7685 -- looks good to me.
waf 1.5.16 fixes the problem
changeset: 6274:3e8b3f2306c9 tag: tip user: Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro <gjc@inescporto.pt> date: Fri Apr 23 15:46:46 2010 +0100 summary: Upgrade to WAF 1.5.16. Fixes bug #855.