From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com (mail-wm1-f65.google.com [209.85.128.65]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3349D6C60B for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:24:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id b11so3989059wmj.1 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 02:24:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id; bh=Uo/2wOsH4+725yObSoq5CsYt8v102zxY9pn2P33tLDo=; b=bhWM8gWTIjsufa+NJu/CZ00thQ9+tvwKrEe5Zii2u1PDmh8nza98787HqKaQOjFOMq piGKN6VzSm04hd/wzILGhorlmnmuTZz7CTMzkAfyx+5bexvUP2iMvGDkB1vN1G+Jdzdn cJjA+5ngjDcj6fQ81sa4MEFUMKqkyZ9xUQNC+EQpIXDDgurgrVIwcf/j6wXWgEnzi4lr +B+Wl6TPs4jSZykbI4Sw0/dUIUBg3bkLpO1cGaOtjLmS+tkm8t/vP5+Aj/6FMYHesCdl mS9N1KtuTIJuDy5Yxx/84aooVKx9RRGpymqBnD2jLLAyNtbgmA+EJ0+fGG7xfAszL6b4 rxPA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id; bh=Uo/2wOsH4+725yObSoq5CsYt8v102zxY9pn2P33tLDo=; b=EeECywLKl7jiuyWv1c446M/nh3ueVHrWf87xt6rfSgiXl1X1b78UCtnXrL8BnfNxN8 x3ea6tsNTPAyDtGilokDBKvMdSC7JcdIMM9EchPgWvIZtNiGVUklzVqMEMBGa29GP1Q8 vO2Mca5Li4wxKQS8zvZZjZESBVHF/mSt7w1mW8WK3RW7n69oI+maFCl0Ghddlg16WN/r l/f6alwEKfonPsyvitbUk25ZbkDTx8HHT9xa9OmWN8BR/gLpwf+ki5HVvf8MhmWEvxgD ECS4ZgiDwStMVgblbG7jv73jolI5Fjjwr1nuZKqLz6Dweuzh+ykwdpvo9GppMXZ7UiLl knQQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukeVWR0J925YCRvhaAhx03MJvXbriE05eaJLuB+oaSy8L4Say7gc AcQts7kKrdXVF4rZq5dKC0bRvcU+ X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN6E0oSnYHqmofXyEwbfx8P9yJxlWXu3gt8yKINmFi5eZfJ4uCz4jAUa/oHQdjk7pP6bm9ZUNw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:2d42:: with SMTP id t63mr15775980wmt.9.1547807056637; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 02:24:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from alexander-box.luxoft.com ([62.96.135.139]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t199sm26245894wmt.1.2019.01.18.02.24.15 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 18 Jan 2019 02:24:15 -0800 (PST) From: Alexander Kanavin To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 11:24:03 +0100 Message-Id: <20190118102403.109744-1-alex.kanavin@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 Subject: [PATCH] sstate.bbclass: make sure changes to SSTATE_SCAN_FILES are not ignored 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: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:24:16 -0000 When changing the SSTATE_SCAN_FILES variable in a recipe it doesn't cause a rebuild, so if there's a sstate-cache available with "bad" sstate data in it that will still be used even though the recipe is updated to address this. [YOCTO #13144] Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin --- meta/classes/sstate.bbclass | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/meta/classes/sstate.bbclass b/meta/classes/sstate.bbclass index 763fce07f95..571a9d0dc5d 100644 --- a/meta/classes/sstate.bbclass +++ b/meta/classes/sstate.bbclass @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ SSTATE_ARCHS = " \ SSTATE_MANMACH ?= "${SSTATE_PKGARCH}" SSTATECREATEFUNCS = "sstate_hardcode_path" +SSTATECREATEFUNCS[vardeps] = "SSTATE_SCAN_FILES" SSTATEPOSTCREATEFUNCS = "" SSTATEPREINSTFUNCS = "" SSTATEPOSTUNPACKFUNCS = "sstate_hardcode_path_unpack" -- 2.17.1