From: michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com
To: docs@lists.yoctoproject.org
Cc: Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com>,
Joshua Watt <JPEWhacker@gmail.com>
Subject: [mickledore][PATCH 3/4] overview: Add note about non-reproducibility side effects
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 15:37:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231011133720.78265-3-michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231011133720.78265-1-michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com>
From: Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com>
From: Joshua Watt <JPEWhacker@gmail.com>
Adds an additional note about some of the side effects that can occur if
recipes are not reproducible and hash equivalence is enabled.
Signed-off-by: Joshua Watt <JPEWhacker@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com>
---
documentation/overview-manual/concepts.rst | 9 +++++++++
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/documentation/overview-manual/concepts.rst b/documentation/overview-manual/concepts.rst
index 668e002565..80d75dd7c3 100644
--- a/documentation/overview-manual/concepts.rst
+++ b/documentation/overview-manual/concepts.rst
@@ -1963,6 +1963,15 @@ task output from the Shared State cache.
the stability of the task's output hash. Therefore, the effectiveness
of Hash Equivalence strongly depends on it.
+ Recipes that are not reproducible may have undesired behavior if hash
+ equivalence is enabled, since the non-reproducible diverging output maybe be
+ remapped to an older sstate object in the cache by the server. If a recipe
+ is non-reproducible in trivial ways, such as different timestamps, this is
+ likely not a problem. However recipes that have more dramatic changes (such
+ as completely different file names) will likely outright fail since the
+ downstream sstate objects are not actually equivalent to what was just
+ built.
+
This applies to multiple scenarios:
- A "trivial" change to a recipe that doesn't impact its generated output,
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-11 13:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-11 13:37 [mickledore][PATCH 1/4] ref-manual: releases.svg: Scarthgap is now version 5.0 michael.opdenacker
2023-10-11 13:37 ` [mickledore][PATCH 2/4] dev-manual: fix testimage usage instructions michael.opdenacker
2023-10-11 13:37 ` michael.opdenacker [this message]
2023-10-11 13:37 ` [mickledore][PATCH 4/4] migration-guides: add release notes for 4.0.13 michael.opdenacker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20231011133720.78265-3-michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com \
--to=michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com \
--cc=JPEWhacker@gmail.com \
--cc=docs@lists.yoctoproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox