On Mon, 2023-10-23 at 11:17 +0200, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 at 13:55, Richard Purdie
> wrote:
> > > > Seems like that ('auto') had no effect. :-(
> > >
> > > Hit send too quickly. Should I try with your suggestion?
> >
> > It is worth a shot, yes. One causes a local
On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 at 13:55, Richard Purdie
wrote:
> > > Seems like that ('auto') had no effect. :-(
> >
> > Hit send too quickly. Should I try with your suggestion?
>
> It is worth a shot, yes. One causes a local hashequiv whereas the other
> disables it entirely.
Seems like it worked:
On Sun, 2023-10-22 at 13:52 +0200, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 at 13:52, Alexander Kanavin via
> lists.openembedded.org
> wrote:
> > > > > I did idly wonder if we need to set the sig handler to not use
> > > > > hashequiv for these tests? I haven't checked if that would help
>
On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 at 13:52, Alexander Kanavin via
lists.openembedded.org
wrote:
> > > > I did idly wonder if we need to set the sig handler to not use
> > > > hashequiv for these tests? I haven't checked if that would help though,
> > > > I'm just making a wild guess.
> > >
> > > I fired it up
On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 at 16:39, Richard Purdie
wrote:
> > > I did idly wonder if we need to set the sig handler to not use
> > > hashequiv for these tests? I haven't checked if that would help though,
> > > I'm just making a wild guess.
> >
> > I fired it up with BB_HASHSERVE = "auto" set inside
On Fri, 2023-10-20 at 16:34 +0200, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 at 15:44, Richard Purdie
> wrote:
> > I did idly wonder if we need to set the sig handler to not use
> > hashequiv for these tests? I haven't checked if that would help though,
> > I'm just making a wild guess.
>
>
On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 at 15:44, Richard Purdie
wrote:
> I did idly wonder if we need to set the sig handler to not use
> hashequiv for these tests? I haven't checked if that would help though,
> I'm just making a wild guess.
I fired it up with BB_HASHSERVE = "auto" set inside the test, let's see:
On Fri, 2023-10-20 at 15:12 +0200, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2023 at 21:39, Alexandre Belloni
> wrote:
> > ERROR: Can't find a task we're supposed to have written out? (hash:
> > e79d70b9c2cc72030c1ce822525510699a1eeb1ddf5986271d3217422244366a)?
> > ERROR: Can't find a task we're
On Wed, 18 Oct 2023 at 21:39, Alexandre Belloni
wrote:
> ERROR: Can't find a task we're supposed to have written out? (hash:
> e79d70b9c2cc72030c1ce822525510699a1eeb1ddf5986271d3217422244366a)?
> ERROR: Can't find a task we're supposed to have written out? (hash:
>
Hello Alex,
I had this failure on the oe-selftest-armhost builder:
https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/127/builds/2290/steps/14/logs/stdio
Task texinfo-dummy-native:do_configure couldn't be used from the cache because:
We need hash
'bitbake -S printdiff' is a useful diagnostic facility for finding out
why sstate is not being reused, but until now it had no tests that would
ensure it works. This commit adds three basic scenarios:
1. make a change in a really basic, common recipe that is at the very root
of dependency trees
11 matches
Mail list logo
