Re: [PATCH] Revert "bitbake.conf: don't remove WARN_QA and ERROR_QA from hashes"

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Fri, 2015-02-06 at 16:02 +0100, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 12:21:23PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:18 PM, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 6 February 2015 at 14:10, Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I think they should re-run. Otherwise we can end having errors and QA
> > >> issues unnoticed until a full rebuild.
> > >
> > >
> > > That was the state of things until my original patch last week.  The patch
> > > had the side-effect that changing QA tasks causing *everything* to rebuild.
> > > I'm really not sure that's a good solution.
> > 
> > If someone adds a QA tasks it is because it matters. In this case we
> > ought to have it in an immediate effect so it does makes sense to
> > rerun everything.
> > 
> > I know it is bad from build time point of view but predictability and
> > correctness is more important from my point of view.
> 
> Agreed, especially when someone decides to make something fatal it
> should highlight all failing recipes before it's enabled in "official"
> build instead of sneaking the failures one-by-one as sstate is being
> invalidated by other changes.

Thinking about this from the other angle. Should someone having a
different set of WARN/ERROR local settings mean they don't reuse sstate?

Cheers,

Richard