Re: [PATCH 1/1] base-files: do_install.sigdata: remove the depends on DATE

[Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2625 bytes --]

On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 10:53:20AM -0700, Chris Larson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Richard Purdie <
> richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2014-03-27 at 10:21 -0700, Chris Larson wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Robert Yang
> > > <liezhi.yang@windriver.com> wrote:
> > >         If we run "bitbake -S base-files" today, and re-run it
> > >         tomorrow with
> > >         nothing changed, we would see that the do_install.sigdata
> > >         changes
> > >         because of:
> > >
> > >         do_intall -> do_install_basefilesissue -> DISTRO_VERSION ->
> > >         DATE
> > >
> > >         We had set:
> > >         IMAGE_NAME[vardepsexclude] += "DATETIME"
> > >         in meta/conf/bitbake.conf, we can set a similar line in
> > >         base-files_3.0.14.bb to fix the problem.
> > >
> > >         [YOCTO #6032]
> > >
> > >         Signed-off-by: Robert Yang <liezhi.yang@windriver.com>
> > >
> > > Wont't this mean base-files wouldn't be rebuilt when the day changes?
> > > This seems problematic to me. I think this is a legitimate case for a
> > > checksum change. If the distro version changes due to the date
> > > changing, and the base-files includes the distro version in the issue
> > > file, then we'd *want* base-files to rebuild to ensure the issue file
> > > is correct, otherwise it'd be inaccurate, no?
> > >
> > I'm torn on this. Package feed creators probably don't want a package
> > feed where the package changes daily but I can see this from both sides,
> > I have often wondered why my build was rebuilding base-files...
> 
> 
> Perhaps we should either not use DATE/TIME in the distro version at all, or
> have a variable which is the current date, and a variable which locks to
> the date of the creation of the TMPDIR but doesn't change after that, or
> something, as a more persistent build environment identifier to use for
> such cases. *shrug*

I think that the DATE specific part should be moved to separate recipe
which will clearly indicate it's just "build version".

I'm using shr-version recipe which just puts file in sysconfdir so it's
not so surprising to see shr-version recipe being rebuilt everyday and I
still know when the user last updated from feed.

It's also useful to pull such recipe into image by IMAGE_INSTALL not
through packagegroup (as otherwise the packagegroup could be rebuilt
every day as well - at least until runtime deps for packagegroups were
excluded in signature handler).

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]