Re: [xml-cppdom-devel] Patch to correct windows build

[Doug M. <mc...@ia...>]

On Apr 11, 2011, at 9:04 AM, Patrick Hartling wrote:

> On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Doug McCorkle wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Patrick Hartling <pat...@gm...> wrote:
>> On Apr 4, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote:
>> 
>> > On Apr 4, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Patrick Hartling wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:53 PM, Doug McCorkle wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hello,
>> >>>
>> >>> I have attached two patches that correct the usage of scons on windows and I added a missing header.
>> >>
>> >> What is the minimum required version of SCons after applying the build changes? I haven't been keeping up with SCons API changes/deprecations.
>> >
>> > I changed it to 2.0 in the SConstruct. I took the liberty of doing this since I am not sure why anyone would really want to run something older than the latest stable release of SCons.
>> 
>> I see your point. I am just a little hesitant because there will probably be at least a few people who can't easily update to SCons 2.0. That said, if people do complain about this, we have the option of distributing and using a local SCons within the CppDOM build, right?
>> 
>> I do not really follow your question. I understand your hesitation though.
> 
> I just meant that CppDOM could include its own SCons 2.0 local installation if users run into problems with being unable to install SCons 2.0 themselves.

Yes, we could easily do that. Thanks for the clarification. This would also be the same issue with the gmtl patch I submitted.

Doug