Re: is sstate-cache really deterministic together with shlibs providers?

[Phil Blundell <pb@pbcl.net>]

On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 22:43 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> 2) RP2+PB: Warning/Error if two things provide the same shlibs
>    - probably better to error out when bar.bb is being built and tries
>      to provide the same libabc libabc.bb, it can be in different order
>      as bar does not depends on libabc, so next time it can show error
>      when building libabc, but IMHO better then showing error when foo 
>      finds out 2 possible libabc providers

Raising an error if libabc is already staged when bar is built would be
good as well, but I don't think this is sufficient in the general case.
Consider:

1. bitbake libabc

-> no problem, bar isn't built yet, libabc goes into sstate-cache

2. rm -rf $TMPDIR; bitbake bar

-> also no problem, libabc isn't in the sysroot anymore, bar goes into
sysroot (and sstate-cache)

3. bitbake foo

-> libabc comes back from sstate but bar is still there, disaster
strikes.

Obviously that particular example is a bit contrived, but you can
imagine that if your sstate-cache (or part of it) is shared among
multiple users then this sort of situation could arise fairly easily.

p.