Using bitbake in minimal chroot environment

[Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>]

Hi,

I'm just thinking about using bitbake only in minimalistic chroot.

What are advantages/disadvantages?

How I see it:

Advantages:
1) more secure (I started to use separate user for bitbake, when I
   started to play with bitbake master instead release - because that
   warning it said), but chroot is even better.
2) less problems when autotools pick some header or lib from buildhost
   instead of staging
3) easier to check, that -native package is missing for some important
   lib

Disadvantages:
1) Few more MB for building environment (extra libc, gcc, binutils, git, 
   svn, sh, etc. installed in chroot
2) More administrative to keep chroot system updated
3) harder to check, that autotools won't pick something from buildhost
   in normal environment before pushing new version/recipe (ie I won't
   have SDL libs installed in chroot, but everybody else will and maybe
   build will fail for them after I push some recipe.

If nobody points some big disadvantage I didn't think about, I'll give
it a try (with precompilled gentoo stage tarball it's task for half an
hour using cp :)).

Using some sofisticated sandbox setting (as gentoo ebuilds do) would be
also good alternative, is someone trying that?

Regards,

-- 
uin:136542059                jid:Martin.Jansa@gmail.com
Jansa Martin                 sip:jamasip@voip.wengo.fr 
JaMa