From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.reciva.com ([109.169.29.93] helo=crown.reciva.com) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OKDSK-0003Aj-JE for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 18:39:47 +0200 Received: from [62.7.80.98] (helo=lurch.internal.reciva.com) by crown.reciva.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OKDOE-0001Ye-1w for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 17:35:30 +0100 Received: from mill.internal.reciva.com ([192.168.106.87] ident=pb) by lurch.internal.reciva.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1OKDOD-0004cr-NV for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 17:35:29 +0100 From: Phil Blundell To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org In-Reply-To: <1275555319.4657.42.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> References: <201006022351.38129.pieterg@gmx.com> <20100603043505.GJ16035@jama> <201006030915.57362.pieterg@gmx.com> <20100603073717.GK16035@jama> <1275552817.4657.32.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> <20100603083011.GM16035@jama> <1275554237.4657.40.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> <20100603084631.GN16035@jama> <1275555319.4657.42.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 17:35:29 +0100 Message-ID: <1275582929.15559.65.camel@mill.internal.reciva.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.2 X-Broken-Reverse-DNS: no host name found for IP address 62.7.80.98 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 109.169.29.93 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: philb@gnu.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no 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: AUTOREV and SRCPV 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: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 16:40:05 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 09:55 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 10:46 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > > So will bitbake build again the same recipe (because I've built from the > > same one before) with lower PV, just because it _still_ has the highest > > DEFAULT_PREFERENCE and it's desired version (but still lower PV because > > of hash, then before)?. > > Yes, I think so. PV, and hence P, will be different and that's about > all that matters to bitbake. The fact that PF is the same should be > irrelevant; I don't think any of its persistent state is keyed on that. I did a quick test on this and it does indeed seem to work as you would expect. So that seems like the easiest way of solving the problem at hand. p.