Re: Using bitbake in minimal chroot environment

[Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 15-02-10 18:19, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 05:59:39PM +0100, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>> I'm just thinking about using bitbake only in minimalistic chroot.
> 
> Already rebuilding in new chroot :).
> 
>>>>
>>>> What are advantages/disadvantages?
>>>>
>>>> How I see it:
>>>>
>>>> Advantages:
>>>> 1) more secure (I started to use separate user for bitbake, when I
>>>>    started to play with bitbake master instead release - because that
>>>>    warning it said), but chroot is even better.
>>>> 2) less problems when autotools pick some header or lib from buildhost
>>>>    instead of staging
>>>> 3) easier to check, that -native package is missing for some important
>>>>    lib
>>>>
>>>> Disadvantages:
>>>> 1) Few more MB for building environment (extra libc, gcc, binutils, git,
>>>>    svn, sh, etc. installed in chroot
>>
>> If they are on the same filesystem you could use hard links and save those MBs.
> 
> Not so big problem for me, so I used mount --bind for dirs I want to
> share (ie /usr/portage as I'm using gentoo) and it took only about
> 100MB.. so not a big deal
> 
>>>> 2) More administrative to keep chroot system updated
>>>> 3) harder to check, that autotools won't pick something from buildhost
>>>>    in normal environment before pushing new version/recipe (ie I won't
>>>>    have SDL libs installed in chroot, but everybody else will and maybe
>>>>    build will fail for them after I push some recipe.
>>>
>>> I see this as a good thing :)
> 
> The last point? Well it's good for me (less issues) but if I push some
> recipe failing for 99% other builders just because they have pretty
> standard libs on their systems, then I should be blamed for pushing
> crappy recipe :).
> 
>> Seems a good plan to me, please keep us posted.
>> (actually I've been considering building in a minimalistic VM)
> 
> Well VM would be much slower.. 

On a recent intel/amd cpu VMs I can't measure much difference between VM
and non-vm builds.
My main buildmachine at work is an ubuntu 8.04LTS vm running under
windows XP. The only major speedup I can get building in a native
install would be using 64bit, since the VM is 32 bit, but it does expose
both CPU cores :)

regards,

Koen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFLeZW6MkyGM64RGpERAtFOAJ9hOQA/80gWA5pzQQW9vZ34Kcmy7ACgh6vV
zSccfttlBkf/RDcRCiYQMqg=
=ID01
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----