On Tue, 2024-01-23 at 20:14 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 at 20:11, Joakim Tjernlund
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2024-01-23 at 20:02 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> > > Host tools can influence reproducibility of target items too, so I
> > > would not want to use the same
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 at 20:11, Joakim Tjernlund
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2024-01-23 at 20:02 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> > Host tools can influence reproducibility of target items too, so I
> > would not want to use the same set in both builds. Checking for
> > reproducibility is simply something
On Tue, 2024-01-23 at 20:02 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> Host tools can influence reproducibility of target items too, so I
> would not want to use the same set in both builds. Checking for
> reproducibility is simply something that needs a powerful machine.
We would like to start gently,
Host tools can influence reproducibility of target items too, so I
would not want to use the same set in both builds. Checking for
reproducibility is simply something that needs a powerful machine.
Alex
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 at 19:52, Joakim Tjernlund
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2024-01-22 at 21:39 +0100,
On Mon, 2024-01-22 at 21:39 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 17:49, Joakim Tjernlund
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2024-01-22 at 17:19 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> > > On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 16:59, Joakim Tjernlund
> > > wrote:
> > > > Maybe but what about the missing
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 17:49, Joakim Tjernlund
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2024-01-22 at 17:19 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> > On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 16:59, Joakim Tjernlund
> > wrote:
> > > Maybe but what about the missing reproducibleA/tmp and reproducibleB/tmp ?
> > > Would these be missing if
On Mon, 2024-01-22 at 17:19 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 16:59, Joakim Tjernlund
> wrote:
> > Maybe but what about the missing reproducibleA/tmp and reproducibleB/tmp ?
> > Would these be missing if sstate is used for both?
> > In the log there is this:
> > INFO -
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 16:59, Joakim Tjernlund
wrote:
> Maybe but what about the missing reproducibleA/tmp and reproducibleB/tmp ?
> Would these be missing if sstate is used for both?
> In the log there is this:
> INFO - Building reproducibleB (sstate NOT allowed)...
It's possible your
On Mon, 2024-01-22 at 16:10 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> You are not showing what kind of error you expect to see. What is
> being tested for non-reproducibility?
Right, I hacked u-boot to set current date:
--- a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot.inc
+++ b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot.inc
@@
You are not showing what kind of error you expect to see. What is
being tested for non-reproducibility?
Also the short completion time is suspicious: it might indicate that
both runs indeed take the same package from sstate. The test expects
that the second run uses a private empty sstate to
10 matches
Mail list logo