From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RntMV-0006IY-AU for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 15:53:11 +0100 Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 19 Jan 2012 06:45:31 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,351,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="100416047" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.122.198]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 19 Jan 2012 06:45:30 -0800 From: Paul Eggleton To: Koen Kooi Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 14:45:29 +0000 Message-ID: <12179414.hR7YIgmyms@helios> Organization: Intel Corporation User-Agent: KMail/4.7.3 (Linux/3.0.0-14-generic-pae; KDE/4.7.4; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: <7BD299FF-ED9A-4C3C-9581-4EF9B8D89B25@dominion.thruhere.net> References: <1326978483.2511.68.camel@ted> <7BD299FF-ED9A-4C3C-9581-4EF9B8D89B25@dominion.thruhere.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: Buildhistory in action X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 14:53:11 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Thursday 19 January 2012 15:37:38 Koen Kooi wrote: > If you want to see a longer history, have a look at > https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/buildhistory/commits/master, I've > been using it heavily today when working on udev 177 which changed its > default filesystem layout. One thing to keep in mind: > > $ du -hs /data/ssd/OE/buildhistory/ > 548M /data/ssd/OE/buildhistory/ Hmm, I wouldn't have expected it to be quite that large, but I guess it depends what you're doing with it, and I'd imagine given the number of builds you run you probably stress it more than most (which is good :). In the end 500M is just a drop in the bucket compared to the rest of TMPDIR... > I keep it on an SSD to avoid needing to wait a few minutes after every > bitbake invocation. Good advice :) It's also worth noting it will noticeably increase the do_rootfs time (especially for RPM) and probably do_package as well. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre