Re: [PATCH 1/2] bitbake: ensure -f causes dependent tasks to be re-run

[Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>]

On Thursday 21 June 2012 14:26:37 Björn Stenberg wrote:
> Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > Why do you want it to be producing the same checksum for potentially
> > different contents?
> 
> I don't. Sorry if that was unclear. I want:
> 
> a) That we don't need an -f option at all, i.e. that we have dependency
> tracking pinned down so well that any changed input automatically causes a
> rebuild and changed hash. (A boy can dream, can't he? :-), or

If you mean inputs that come entirely from the metadata, we can do this 
already (although the final pieces - namely detecting changes to local files 
referred to in SRC_URI, and detecting changes to varflags - only went in very 
recently). So for most of the cases in the past where you would have edited 
the recipe and/or files that the recipe points to and then needed to use -f to 
rebuild, now you no longer need to use -f and next time the recipe is called 
for it will be rebuilt automatically. I think we do need to communicate this 
more effectively though.

> b) A different name for the -f option, or
> 
> c) A clear information message when using -f, maybe something like "INFO:
> Tainting the hash to force a rebuild", that alerts the user to the
> goings-on under the hood.

I think c) is reasonable. I'll put together a follow-up patch today to add 
this.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre