On Monday 09 August 2021 at 09:09:16 -0500, Seebs wrote: > On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 13:19:51 +0100 > "Mike Crowe via lists.openembedded.org" > wrote: > > > Cleaning the work directory makes the problem go away because that > > deletes the pseudo databases. > > > > Does the above make sense as an explanation for these errors? If so, > > is there a good way to avoid these errors? > > Good diagnostic work, makes sense to me. It would make some sense for > pseudo to ignore mismatches involving ignored paths, but it wasn't > originally designed with the ignored paths concept, so it currently > doesn't. Thanks for the review. I have a test case and patch for pseudo (attached) to detect newly-ignored paths and warn rather than abort on them, but I'm not really convinced that it is the right solution. Ideally the errant entry would be removed from the database too in order to avoid having to continue to consult the ignore list. It's not even clear to me that oe-core continuing to use an existing pseudo database after the value of PSEUDO_CLIENT_IGNORE_PATH changes is a sane thing to expect to work. Perhaps we could just arrange to force a whole new work directory in that case? Thanks. Mike.