From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qy0-f176.google.com (mail-qy0-f176.google.com [209.85.216.176]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4662E01373 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 04:52:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by qcsg14 with SMTP id g14so748921qcs.35 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 04:52:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BQqwhItHyoJQel905GOh8igzt3iY0/ABISL41ZfTKhM=; b=NylPmS0DLzJLZHUPuUS/9NtiM/uu7+1fQgvaTGKYKHH5aOnWN7sBYhhN2IWbSlA8F9 QsPXuiDWmFh6h7Ckr3J9CjW20lGHdohMof9l5gJJZUWd2T4Dij/GLYcJeqryry4fWds0 6Fr2WzxKm25EJTbZeNWcSNexACz6jK4gMCe24= Received: by 10.224.195.133 with SMTP id ec5mr8725043qab.7.1327323126820; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 04:52:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.54] (nc-184-3-54-63.dhcp.embarqhsd.net. [184.3.54.63]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r17sm26764569qap.11.2012.01.23.04.52.03 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 23 Jan 2012 04:52:04 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4F1D57CE.2050807@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 07:51:26 -0500 From: jfabernathy User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111124 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gary Thomas References: <56375FA8-BB1F-4D3B-91EC-C84665DF9905@gmail.com> <4F1CB41A.301@mlbassoc.com> In-Reply-To: <4F1CB41A.301@mlbassoc.com> Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: tar ball vs. git development questions X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 12:52:07 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/22/2012 08:12 PM, Gary Thomas wrote: > 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? > I'm not sure it does. I don't want poky to do more work. I have my download directory, $DL_DIR, outside my build directory so I can keep it run to run, as mentioned in the comments in local.conf. I was trying to understand 2 basic questions: 1. what could be causing build failures using a freshly created bare clone yesterday vs. using the poky-edison-6.0 tarball. It would be scary if you could clone the linux-yocto-3.0 successfully one day and have it be used in a build successfully, but clone it another day and it not work. I figured that bitbake/poky pulled the same information into DL_DIR regardless of whether you pulled from the bare clone locally or straight from the on-line repository. 2. I was trying to look at items to speed up build runs. I thought that if the downloads in DL_DIR were reused if they existed, it would speed up a run. It seems to. So the question is, after the first build, the files I need for linux-yocto-3.0 are in DL_DIR regardless of whether they came from the online repository or the local bare clone. right? Jim A