From: Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com>
To: James Abernathy <jfabernathy@gmail.com>
Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org
Subject: Re: tar ball vs. git development questions
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 18:12:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F1CB41A.301@mlbassoc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56375FA8-BB1F-4D3B-91EC-C84665DF9905@gmail.com>
On 2012-01-22 13:19, James Abernathy wrote:
> I have used both git and the tarball methods of bitbaking projects, all of them derivatives of the examples in the Yocto documentation. I was having issues using the local clone of
> the Yocto kernel git repository this weekend. I had successfully done that before, but I was rebuilding the PC workstation, and getting everything setup and tested some of the
> meta-intel BSPs to make sure I had everything right. Cloning the linux-yocto-3.0 repository was successful, but the bakes against it failed. I made sure I had poky-extras setup
> right, but I still had problems. To isolate the problem, I changed to building with the tarballs and everything worked fine.
>
> So that got me thinking what are the differences between the 2 methods:
>
> * I assume that if I use the tarball method, bitbake, using the recipes, pulls down files from the online repositories and puts those files into the centralized local download
> directory ($DL_DIR), allowing reuse instead of re-downloading each time. The content downloaded for linux-yocto-3.0 is exactly what would be pulled from the local repository if
> I used a local clone of the git repository for linux-yocto-3.0.
> * If my assumption above is correct, if I'm not modifying the source code of the kernel (only changing config parameters), then once you've run at least one build with the
> tarball method, the $DL_DIR directory contains all the files you'll need to build any image with linux-yocto-3.0. So there is no need to have a local clone of the kernel
> repository for speeding up development. Am I right?
> * If I have a successful creation of a bare clone of linux-yocto-3.0.git, how could builds of Edison packages be failing? That makes me concerned about using git and successfully
> repeating builds of stable branches like Edison.
If you set BB_GENERATE_MIRROR_TARBALLS = "1" (e.g. in local.conf)
then you'll get tarballs which hold the git repositories after
download. You can then reuse these (by sharing the DL_DIR or
using a local mirror). Does that help with the issue you're seeing?
--
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas | Consulting for the
MLB Associates | Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-23 1:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-22 20:19 tar ball vs. git development questions James Abernathy
2012-01-23 1:12 ` Gary Thomas [this message]
2012-01-23 12:51 ` jfabernathy
2012-01-23 13:10 ` Gary Thomas
2012-01-23 14:01 ` Bruce Ashfield
2012-01-24 21:24 ` James Abernathy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F1CB41A.301@mlbassoc.com \
--to=gary@mlbassoc.com \
--cc=jfabernathy@gmail.com \
--cc=yocto@yoctoproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.