From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Cavallari Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:38:07 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCHv2 11/21] pkg-download: extend DOWNLOAD_INNER, add a SOURCE_CHECK macro In-Reply-To: <552D97B1.5010705@mind.be> References: <1428856685-4403-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <1428856685-4403-12-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20150413210024.GK29025@free.fr> <552D732C.3060907@mind.be> <20150414222545.GD4053@free.fr> <552D97B1.5010705@mind.be> Message-ID: <5530E28F.2010600@green-communications.fr> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 15/04/2015 00:41, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > On 15/04/15 00:25, Yann E. MORIN wrote: >> In the ned, does source-check really makes sense? >> >> Let me rephrase... >> >> What's the purpose of source-check? >> >> As far as I can see, there are two use-cases: >> >> - for us Buildroot devs: check that an upstream still provides a >> resource; >> >> - for a standard user to check if he can get the source of his set of >> packages. >> >> But is that really necessary? >> >> For a user, what can he do if the package can't be downloaded (i.e. not >> in upstream and not on our mirror)? Nothing... >> >> For us, all we need to know is that something can't be downloaded so we >> can bump the package (or point it to our mirror). We have autobuilders >> to catch download failures. >> >> So, does it make sense to keep source-check at all? > > > I was thinking the same thing, I can't really see a use case for it. Actually, > same thing for external-deps. external-deps is useful: We use it e.g. to clean a dl/ directory after bumping package versions, or to copy only relevant files in dl/ to an offline location. Clearing the dl/ directory and running "make source" would end up with the same thing, but it would redownloads everything so it would be much slower.