Re: package.tgz files not touched in sstate-cache

[Mike Crowe <mac@mcrowe.com>]

On Monday 01 February 2016 at 11:14:50 +0000, Mike Crowe wrote:
> On Friday 29 January 2016 at 17:42:13 +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-01-29 at 15:47 +0000, Mike Crowe wrote:
> > > It turned out that whilst the populate_sysroot.gz and package_ipk.tgz files
> > > were still in the sstate-cache, the package.tgz tarball was not. This meant
> > > that the whole package was built again in order to satisfy the build
> > > dependencies of other packages that had changed.

> > The "right" answer here is to figure out what in your builds seems to
> > be needing the package.tgz files.
> > 
> > The only time the system should need to pull the package tgzs from
> > sstate is if package_qa or package_write_* were going to rerun. This
> > doesn't happen often, if ever. I've sometimes wondered if we should in
> > fact generate them. They are useful for switching package backends.
> >
> > So the fact they're not getting touched doesn't surprise me. The more
> > concerning thing is that its actually trying to use them.
> > 
> > We have found a number of bugs in this area in sstate and have some
> > patches merged, I know there are a small number pending too. Whether
> > we've found all the issues remains unknown.
> 
> The branch we saw this on was using dizzy from about
> e848484989307ae6826ba0f5217f7702322181e3 so it's quite likely that we're
> lacking some more recent fixes.

For those following along at home, it appears that only four commits are
required to remove the need for the package.tgz files and they cherry-pick
easily:

 80b3974081c4a8c604e23982a6db8fb32c616058
 06c891f0fa6c7712eae233dd18612f1ab1889c45
 76aa4f49db7d32bbd35703c64470fdfc63f403a4
 654f0eec426e882e50f688f6d097d992e34e5b40

Thanks again for your help.

Mike.