On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 5:27 AM, Martin Jansa <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 01:07:46PM +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: >> Since updating my copy of bitbake to one which does this extra locking, >> I've come to realise that the constraint of having only one copy of >> bitbake running is a bit of a nuisance when making use of devshells. I >> used to quite often have one or two long-running devshells for packages >> that I was actively working on, and then in parallel with that would use >> bitbake to recompile other things. With the new locking mechanism, as >> soon as I have a single devshell open I am now prohibited from using >> bitbake for anything else in that same build directory. >> >> Would it be reasonable to exempt devshells from that locking or is there >> some compelling reason why they need to be serialised? > > The same does apply to bitbake-diffsigs now after IIRC this patch > http://git.openembedded.org/bitbake/commit/?id=cc70181659c07e04c205e17832846acf1ff31d28 > before that I could use bitbake-diffsigs from any directory (not only > TOPDIR) and also when build in the same directory was still running. >
and also to use runqemu > Cheers, > > -- > Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core > _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
