Re: Master stability update

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 21:51 -0600, Mark Hatle wrote:
> On 1/25/11 9:05 PM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> >> From: Tian, Kevin
> > After a quick check, I guess this is not a problem. for example perl.do_configure
> > changes checksum due to $MACHINE in dependency variables as Dongxiao said.
> > Once perl is not reusable, at least ~10 recieps (libzypp, libtool, rpm, ...) are not
> > reusable too because perl is in their task dependency chain.
> > 
> > I didn't check all the differences yet, but overall feeling is that this should be OK
> > as Dongxiao mentioned there're several obvious MACHINE related recipes. I'll
> > leave to Dongxiao for final confirmation. :-)
> 
> It might be nice (if not a bit dangerous) to be able to say "I want perl version
> X.Y.Z.  I don't really care about the checksum, as long as the version matches..."
> 
> In the case of perl, this is likely to do exactly what we want/need.  In the
> case of other packages (particularly libraries) this could cause serious problems...

Adding "perl" to BB_HASHTASK_WHITELIST would do exactly what you
describe so its at least possible although it doesn't cover a version
specific match which would probably be better as part of DEPENDS
handling.

Stopping it being machine specific is the first thing that needs fixing
though (I have a patch I'm testing for that one).

Cheers,

Richard