From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCHv5 1/9] support/download: reintroduce 'source-check' target
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 15:57:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190317155719.14839925@windsurf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190317143215.GD14237@scaer>
Hello,
On Sun, 17 Mar 2019 15:32:15 +0100
"Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote:
> As discussed with Thomas P., it all depends on the semantics we want to
> give to source-check. But the one implemented by your series does not
> seem that interesting in the end. Yes, it makes your remote-worker-with-
> a-slow-connection maybe a bit more bearable.
>
> It also means that all it says is that, right at the time of source-check,
> here is actually "something" named as you expect, but there is no
> guarantee that a 'make source' later will be able to get that "something"
> anyway.
>
> So, I am still not entirely convinced by the usefulness of source-check.
Just to add to Yann's explanations, here are the two aspects that makes
the proposed semantic of "source-check" a bit weak:
- It only says "something" was available at the specified download
location, but not that this something matches the hash we have in
the package hash file. Hence a successful "make source-check" does
not guarantee a successful "make source".
- It only says at the time of "make source-check" that "something" was
available at the specified download location, but 2 minutes later
the file could be removed upstream, the tag be dropped, etc. Hence a
successful "make source-check" does not guarantee a successful "make
source".
So, a "make source-check" does not provide you much guarantees. It only
tells you that at the time of the source-check, "something" was
available at the specified download location, but you don't know if
that "something" is correct and that it will still be around when
you'll do your build.
If we are willing to accept this very weak semantic of source-check,
then fair enough, but we (and our users) have to be aware of the very
limited guarantees that source-check provides.
What do you think?
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-17 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-19 10:38 [Buildroot] [PATCHv5 1/9] support/download: reintroduce 'source-check' target Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-02-19 10:38 ` [Buildroot] [PATCHv5 2/9] support/download/hg: implement source-check Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-02-19 10:38 ` [Buildroot] [PATCHv5 3/9] support/download/wget: " Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-02-19 10:38 ` [Buildroot] [PATCHv5 4/9] support/download/file: " Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-02-19 10:38 ` [Buildroot] [PATCHv5 5/9] Revert "core/download: drop the SSH command" Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-02-19 10:38 ` [Buildroot] [PATCHv5 6/9] package/pkg-download: export 'SSH' for use in the download backends Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-02-19 10:38 ` [Buildroot] [PATCHv5 7/9] support/download/scp: implement source-check Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-02-19 10:38 ` [Buildroot] [PATCHv5 8/9] support/download/svn: " Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-02-19 10:38 ` [Buildroot] [PATCHv5 9/9] support/download/{bzr, cvs, git}: highlight unimplemented source-check Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-03-17 14:32 ` [Buildroot] [PATCHv5 1/9] support/download: reintroduce 'source-check' target Yann E. MORIN
2019-03-17 14:57 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2019-03-27 13:46 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2019-03-27 14:13 ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2019-03-27 16:35 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2019-03-27 17:25 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2019-04-13 15:24 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2019-04-13 15:51 ` Thomas De Schampheleire
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=20190317155719.14839925@windsurf \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox