From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Greylist: delayed 458 seconds by postgrey-1.34 at layers.openembedded.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 16:02:13 UTC Received: from avasout03.plus.net (avasout03.plus.net [84.93.230.244]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 848327725C for ; Mon, 1 Feb 2016 16:02:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from deneb ([80.229.24.9]) by avasout03 with smtp id D3ua1s0060BmcFC013ub5s; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 15:54:35 +0000 X-CM-Score: 0.00 X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=X8+vUzne c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=E/9URZZQ5L3bK/voZ0g0HQ==:117 a=E/9URZZQ5L3bK/voZ0g0HQ==:17 a=L9H7d07YOLsA:10 a=9cW_t1CCXrUA:10 a=s5jvgZ67dGcA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=jFJIQSaiL_oA:10 a=v2Bel0npaxN5B6V_JlgA:9 a=lc-Gj3QC1r_cbutT:21 a=zDeai6rKt7G0xmNH:21 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 Received: from mac by deneb with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aQGoE-0001By-FZ for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 15:54:34 +0000 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 15:54:34 +0000 From: Mike Crowe To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Message-ID: <20160201155434.GA4351@mcrowe.com> References: <20160129154748.GB19208@mcrowe.com> <1454089333.10340.80.camel@linuxfoundation.org> <20160201111450.GA28760@mcrowe.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160201111450.GA28760@mcrowe.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Subject: Re: package.tgz files not touched in sstate-cache X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2016 16:02:13 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline 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.