-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 341
MSVS: update generation of the vcxproj embedded python script #4818
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
jcbrill
wants to merge
9
commits into
SCons:master
Choose a base branch
from
jcbrill:jbrill-msvs-4809
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+127
−13
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
9a83650
MSVS: update generation of the vcxproj embedded python script
jcbrill f7d7d2a
MSVS: revise generation of the vcxproj embedded python script
jcbrill 3e27697
MSVS: revise the vcxproj embedded python script contents
jcbrill 0a5ba77
MSVS: revise the vcxproj embedded python script contents
jcbrill b2170a1
MSVS: revise the vcxproj embedded python script contents
jcbrill b6a2b51
MSVS: revise the vcxproj embedded python script contents to be backwa…
jcbrill 63603ab
MSVS: revise the vcxproj embedded python script contents to be backwa…
jcbrill eacb5d2
MSVS: revise the vcxproj embedded python script
jcbrill ff494a5
MSVS: minor change of the vcxproj embedded python script
jcbrill File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
realistically I think we can just do
python <path to current scons.py>where python is the python the scons being run was using.All the rest of this like likely no longer needed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think that the SCons module path should only be generated for non-library installations of SCons.
Keep in mind that the generated python path can be deferred until execution of the vcxproj file by Visual Studio. As shown below, it is possible to have one python version executable importing SCons from another python version library site package location. That just seems like a bad idea.
See comment #4818 (comment) below.