From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay1.mentorg.com ([192.94.38.131]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvbCx-0003Wc-L0 for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 19:58:09 +0100 Received: from svr-orw-exc-08.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.97]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1Nvb9q-0004j1-B9 from Tom_Rini@mentor.com for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:54:54 -0700 Received: from NA1-MAIL.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.181]) by SVR-ORW-EXC-08.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:54:54 -0700 Received: from 172.30.80.117 ([172.30.80.117]) by NA1-MAIL.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.181]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:54:53 +0000 Received: from trini-m4400 by na1-mail.mgc.mentorg.com; 27 Mar 2010 11:54:50 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org In-Reply-To: <1269714709.2382.6.camel@gnutoo-desktop> References: <1269437224.1681.134.camel@rex> <1269467167.1681.169.camel@rex> <1269714709.2382.6.camel@gnutoo-desktop> Organization: Mentor Graphics Corporation Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:54:50 -0700 Message-ID: <1269716090.23548.28.camel@trini-m4400> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Mar 2010 18:54:54.0114 (UTC) FILETIME=[FCCBF820:01CACDDE] X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 192.94.38.131 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Tom_Rini@mentor.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: Reproducible builds (Was Re: Checksums in Bitbake) X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:58:09 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 19:31 +0100, GNUtoo wrote: > On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 08:45 +0100, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > > I've seen too often (also outside OE) that two engineers take the same > > source yet still get different results, and that bugs at a customer > > site cannot be reproduced in the lab (and yes, I do know there are > > other ways to tackle this problem)=20 > Also: > bitbake optionaldep > bitbake package > And: > bitbake package >=20 > could result in different binaries/packages due to configure picking > optionaldep in the first case and not in the second one. >=20 > Maybe we should start hardcoding --without-optionaldep for all optional > dependencies that are not in DEPENDS? >=20 > OR...maybe packaged-staging could save us from that issue? >=20 > ( http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/2008/07/01/packaged-staging-and-what-i= t-gives/ ) pstaging catches the implicit required deps, but not the implicit optional deps. IMHO it would be nice, and I think there's been a general OK in this direction, to move towards DISTRO_FEATURES (or so?) toggling --enable-. That's what's needed in this particular case. --=20 Tom Rini Mentor Graphics Corporation