On Mon, 2022-05-02 at 17:44 -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote: > On 2/9/2022 4:38 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > This probably does need a discussion on the architecture list and we need > > some > > discussion and decisions about where/what buildhistory could/should do. > > Adding > > this to buildhistory is all well and good but we don't have a meaningful > > integration/monitoring of existing buildhistory issues in our > > autobuilder/workflow today even before adding new things. > > I was hoping for free cycles. I didn't get one. This will be an intern > project. > > The way I'm thinking is to have the ABI compat XML be part of the state > cache tgz file and come up with a CVE check kind of hook maybe called > "ABI check" that will start flagging problems. > > Would this be a better architecture?
I'm not sure it would. Shared state works by computing inputs into a checksum and then using that checksum to access the cache. Finding a "previous version" or a history to compare to therefore isn't a good fit for it. Buildhistory does fit much better but isn't scaling in a controlled way and I think we need the architecture discussion and an agreed plan rather than trying to tack things onto it. That does mean someone stepping back and considering the various needs users have rather than just an isolated use case. Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#56986): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/56986 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/89009568/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
