From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtprelay-b12.telenor.se ([62.127.194.21]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RYRIr-0006BO-94 for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:53:33 +0100 Received: from ipb4.telenor.se (ipb4.telenor.se [195.54.127.167]) by smtprelay-b12.telenor.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9512DCE10 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 00:46:44 +0100 (CET) X-SENDER-IP: [83.227.56.19] X-LISTENER: [smtp.bredband.net] X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiIkAFz6305T4zgTPGdsb2JhbAAMN4lNnlKCTwEBAQE3giQBAQEBAzhAEQsYCRYPCQMCAQIBMRQGDQgBAb51g3SHQASUa5Ik X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,316,1320620400"; d="scan'208";a="1770667984" Received: from c-1338e353.011-39-73746f12.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se (HELO [10.175.196.242]) ([83.227.56.19]) by ipb4.telenor.se with ESMTP; 08 Dec 2011 00:46:44 +0100 Message-ID: <4EDFFAE5.2040705@emagii.com> Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:46:45 +0100 From: Ulf Samuelsson Organization: eMagii User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110922 Thunderbird/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer References: <4EDF2360.7090402@emagii.com> <4EDF788E.60804@emagii.com> <3741284.XQAanrv0Ii@helios> <1323270054.30601.26.camel@ted> <20111207214317.GC6351@sakrah.homelinux.org> In-Reply-To: <20111207214317.GC6351@sakrah.homelinux.org> Subject: Re: Possible stale tags in the download directory X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: ulf@emagii.com, Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 23:53:33 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2011-12-07 22:43, Khem Raj wrote: > On (07/12/11 15:00), Richard Purdie wrote: >> On Wed, 2011-12-07 at 14:37 +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote: >>> On Wednesday 07 December 2011 15:30:38 Ulf Samuelsson wrote: >>>> Richard says that if the *.done file is there, then the checksum is not >>>> calculated. >>>> Or that is at least how I interpret his comment. >>>> >>>> If the check is always there, why the tag? >>> That's not what my reading of the bitbake source says. >>> bitbake/lib/bb/fetch2/__init__.py contains the only references to .done files >>> and all it does is make sure the done file gets "touched" whenever a fetch for >>> the associated file occurs; it does not otherwise check for its existence. >> It does two things, one is an activity marker useful for seeing whether >> files are in active use and the second is for the checksum calculation >> which only ever happens once after download due to the file (see >> verify_checksum() in that file). > when do we create .done files? if I am in middle of download of a tar > file and I cancel it and restart it does not fetch the file again but > tried to use the corrupt file. > > Is it a big build time hit if checksums are verified all the time ? > I have seen the same problem. -- Best Regards Ulf Samuelsson eMagii