On Tue, 2024-02-27 at 14:23 +0200, Mikko Rapeli wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 12:06:41PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote: > > Should we break it for others so it works for you? > > > > If I merge this patch and then I get other reports in of issues, > > I'm > > going to be left to somehow fix those other problems. Since your > > case > > will work you will object if I revert this but you likely won't > > have > > time to work on the resulting other issues, or be able to reproduce > > them since you're building on zfs. > > > > So you can see my dilemma? :/ > > > > Most people don't build on zfs which is probably what I need to > > balance > > this on. > > What if I make this optional for zfs? If build directory type is zfs, > then --apparent-size is added, else not.
Wouldn't that cause some really interesting bug reports? Asking the user to report their host system filesystem type to debug anything isn't going to be great. I don't like the idea of the non-determinism that introduces but I agree we do already have a determinism issue. What we probably need is the absolute files size, plus a number of files and a number of directories, then you can round up to the worst cases for the block size. Currently that size number is just including the block sizes. Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#196270): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/196270 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/104600633/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
