On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 10:01 AM, ChenQi <Qi.Chen@windriver.com> wrote:

Sharing sstate is safe and efficient.
sstate does not contain any package.

Regards,
Chen Qi

On 11/30/2014 10:28 PM, Qiang Yu wrote:

Why share the sstate? Does it contain previously build ipk packages in other build directories for reuse?

Regards,

Qiang

On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 4:03 PM, ChenQi <Qi.Chen@windriver.com> wrote:

I would suggest to use separate build directories but let these builds to share downloads and sstate.

Regards,
Chen Qi

On 11/30/2014 12:49 PM, Qiang Yu wrote:

Hi all,

I'm maintaining a Yocto build system to produce these outputs:

1. ARM SOC 1
1). board 1 image
2). board 2 image
3). SDK for i686
4). SDK for x86_64
2. ARM SOC 2
1). board 3 image
2). board 4 image
3). SDK for i686
4). SDK for x86_64

Now I don't know the right way to create build directories for these builds. The simplest way
I think is creating one build directory for each of these builds. But it wast resource for boards

with the same SOC which can share cross toolchain. And ARM SOC 1 and ARM SOC 2 use

different conf/bblayers.conf to add different BSP layer, I need to modify it when switch SOC.

So the right way is creating one build directory for each SOC, then bitbake each output's recipe,

right?

I am also not sure if I can put the SDK and board image in the same build directory. Because

once I build a board's image after creating its SDK, I add gdbserver to it, but the build fail without

really building the gdbserver package. So I guess the board image build is confused by the SDK

build state.

So the conclusion is I need a recommended way to separate output into different build directories:

1. minimize rebuild shared packages

2. no build state corruption

3. if multi output in the same build dir, no change to conf/ files or an easy way to switch between

Regards,

Qiang

--
_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto