On 16-11-09 12:51, Martin Jansa wrote:
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 11:59:10AM +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
On 16-11-09 11:49, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Mon, 2009-11-16 at 11:37 +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
So basically every recipe that is using SRCPV in PV or PR is unsuitable
to be put in online feeds. That should be enough to stop the SRCPV merge
into .dev.
How is this different to the current situation though?
In the current situation (actually, last weeks situation) SRCPV was
never used.
If SRCREV is locked down you will get 1 as the local build revision back
and it will not change and will be the same for everyone.
If its not locked down, all bets are off but they always have been - no
change.
Ah, that was the bit of info I was missing. But if SRCREV is locked
down (as it should!) what's the point of putting SRCPV in PV or PR?
It seems to make things worse if you update a locked SRCREV, since
SRCPV will remain '1'.
regards,
Koen
Hi,
I'm not sure if this is 100% right but it behaves like this here:
with AUTOREV used
Which angstrom tries to avoid at great lenghts and any OE recipe fetched
from an scm will by default and policy have a locked down rev available.
A user (or distro) has to explicitly enable AUTOREV for recipes.
as SRCREV you get ${SRCREV} in format
gitrNNNN+hash
where NNNN is localcount incremented on buildhost every time you build
that recipe AND hash is changed
if you have fixed SRCREV then without SRCPV you get just gitrHash which
can be< gitrNNNN+hash or> gitrNNNN+hash depending on actual hash value.
That's why you cannot switch between SRCREV and SRCPV without PE bump.
I'm extremely allergic to PE bumps, because it means we screwed up big time.
If there is SRCPV in PV and you're using fixed SRCREV than you don't
need to bump PR in cases like this
./xorg-proto/calibrateproto_git.bb:PV = "0.0+${PR}+gitr${SRCPV}"
because +gitr${SRCPV} will create non-decreasing sequence as localcount
will be incremented every time you bump fixed SRCREV for that recipe AND
build it.
So, how do I say
PREFERRED_VERSION_calibrateproto = 0.0+r1+gitr483843874931943189393 #
(4838... is what's in sane-srcrevs.inc)
with SRCPV? It seems I would loose the ability to do that 'globally'
since SRCPV is tied to a buildhost.
You're right that there can be inconsistency between builders if one ie
you're changing fixed srcrev every day and rebuild it on that buildhost
and othere buildhost is rebuilding that package once a month.
If all your builders are building all your targets every day and you're
not changing fixed SRCREV more then once a day, you need to sync
bb_persist_data.sqlite3 only for new builder or after some failures
(which I know is quite error-prone :().
So SRCPV makes things worse than the current situation.
This inconsistency can be fixed imho only by sharing
tmpdir-dev-shr/cache/om-gta02/bb_persist_data.sqlite3 between hosts
(better using some online database access for getting localcounts)
sqlite3 ../tmpdir-dev-shr/cache/om-gta02/bb_persist_data.sqlite3
"select * from BB_URI_LOCALCOUNT where key like
'%kernel.git-linux-openmoko-shr-drm-devel_count';"
git:git.openmoko.org.git.kernel.git-linux-openmoko-shr-drm-devel_count|5
So it seems that using SRCPV in PV and PR shouldn't be allowed till
there is *good* way to share the 'localcount' to all builders.
regards,
Koen
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
