From: Emeric Vigier <emeric.vigier@savoirfairelinux.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 1/1] Makefile: add target to clean targetfs
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 17:56:43 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55A5859B.2010809@savoirfairelinux.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <553DF343.8010400@andin.de>
On 15-04-27 04:28 AM, Andreas Naumann wrote:
>
>
> Am 27.04.2015 um 02:45 schrieb Emeric Vigier:
>> If you had some files added to the targetfs (fs-overlay, new packages,
>> ...) and you no longer need them, buildroot does not offer a simple way
>> to remove these items from the output/target directory. The rule added
>> by this commit allows you to clean the targetfs. Issuing 'make'
>> afterward will generate a new and clean targetfs.
>>
>> A section in the documentation is also added. It describes few examples
>> when developers could need it. 'make help' is also updated accordingly.
>> And full-rebuild section of the documentation is updated with content
>> and links.
>>
>
> Hi Emeric,
>
> this is very helpful, in fact i have a similar patch running for quite
> some time where I remove target/ and images/ and the corresponding
> stamps. There are some problems though and I want to share my findings
> with you.
> To begin with i was not 100% sure if the recreated target is the same as
> after a clean build. So I wrote a small check script which compares the
> original with the re-installed target trees. Here's the comparison i do:
>
> rsync -rvncl --delete --exclude '*.pyc' --exclude '*.pyo' --exclude
> 'tmp/ldconfig/aux-cache' output/target/ target.orig/
Hi Andreas,
Sorry for the delay (BOFH excuse #273: The cord jumped over and hit the
power switch). I finally have some time to work on this.
I ran your rsync command on a beaglebone_defconfig and ended up with
some differences indeed:
$ rsync -rvncl --delete --exclude '*.pyc' --exclude '*.pyo' --exclude
'tmp/ldconfig/aux-cache' output/target/ output/target.orig/
sending incremental file list
deleting lib/libgcc_s.so.1
deleting lib/libgcc_s.so
deleting lib/libatomic.so.1.1.0
deleting lib/libatomic.so.1
deleting lib/libatomic.so
sent 12,704 bytes received 165 bytes 8,579.33 bytes/sec
total size is 1,671,066 speedup is 129.85 (DRY RUN)
> As you see it already has some files excluded that are always recreated
> differently.
> In addition I need to delete .stamp_host_installed from host-gcc-final*
> to force reinstall of libstdc++ into target (using external linaro
> toolchain).
removing $(BUILD_DIR)/host-gcc-final-*/.stamp_host_installed in the
'target-clean' recipe fixed that issue. But is this solution generic enough?
> Another problem that showed up was that some of the package install
> steps dont seem separated very well. E.g. qt5 examples copies everything
> from a certain staging-dir/* to target/..
> A later qt5 module also creates files in that staging-dir, so next round
> there's more files in target.
>
> I realize this is due to my way of not deleteing the staging dir any
> longer - I used to in the beginning. If I recall correctly this is
> because I noticed some packages copy files into staging/ during compile
> and these files are then missing after a reinstall. I'm not entirely
> sure though.
I enabled qt4 and compare the targetfs after a target-clean, no differences:
$ rsync -rvncl --delete --exclude '*.pyc' --exclude '*.pyo' --exclude
'tmp/ldconfig/aux-cache' output/target/ output/target.orig.qt4/
sending incremental file list
sent 15,095 bytes received 62 bytes 30,314.00 bytes/sec
total size is 16,028,992 speedup is 1,057.53 (DRY RUN)
With what QT configs did you meet problems specifically?
> So my question is, in your approach, are you certain the re-installed
> staging/ is the same as the original for all packages? Maybe you can run
> some comparison like my rsync line for staging as well.
Yes, I have to check that too.
>
>
> regards,
> Andreas
thanks,
--
Emeric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-14 21:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-10 0:25 [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] Makefile: add target to clean targetfs Emeric Vigier
2015-03-10 4:45 ` Baruch Siach
2015-03-10 14:56 ` Emeric Vigier
2015-03-10 15:17 ` Baruch Siach
2015-03-10 19:28 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v2 " Emeric Vigier
2015-03-10 23:41 ` Ryan Barnett
2015-03-11 5:06 ` Baruch Siach
2015-03-11 8:22 ` Angelo Compagnucci
2015-03-11 8:58 ` Baruch Siach
2015-03-12 8:32 ` Angelo Compagnucci
2015-03-12 14:56 ` Emeric Vigier
2015-03-12 14:44 ` Emeric Vigier
2015-03-12 14:46 ` Ryan Barnett
2015-03-12 8:36 ` Angelo Compagnucci
2015-03-12 15:59 ` Jérôme Oufella
2015-04-27 0:45 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 " Emeric Vigier
2015-04-27 4:11 ` Baruch Siach
2015-04-28 14:36 ` Emeric Vigier
2015-04-27 8:28 ` Andreas Naumann
2015-04-28 15:06 ` Emeric Vigier
2015-07-14 21:56 ` Emeric Vigier [this message]
2015-07-16 15:15 ` Emeric Vigier
2015-07-23 20:51 ` Andreas Naumann
2015-10-04 16:56 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
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=55A5859B.2010809@savoirfairelinux.com \
--to=emeric.vigier@savoirfairelinux.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