[yocto] tar ball vs. git development questions
jfabernathy
jfabernathy at gmail.com
Mon Jan 23 04:51:26 PST 2012
On 01/22/2012 08:12 PM, Gary Thomas wrote:
> On 2012-01-22 13:19, James Abernathy wrote:
>> I have used both git and the tarball methods of bitbaking projects,
>> all of them derivatives of the examples in the Yocto documentation. I
>> was having issues using the local clone of
>> the Yocto kernel git repository this weekend. I had successfully done
>> that before, but I was rebuilding the PC workstation, and getting
>> everything setup and tested some of the
>> meta-intel BSPs to make sure I had everything right. Cloning the
>> linux-yocto-3.0 repository was successful, but the bakes against it
>> failed. I made sure I had poky-extras setup
>> right, but I still had problems. To isolate the problem, I changed to
>> building with the tarballs and everything worked fine.
>>
>> So that got me thinking what are the differences between the 2 methods:
>>
>> * I assume that if I use the tarball method, bitbake, using the
>> recipes, pulls down files from the online repositories and puts those
>> files into the centralized local download
>> directory ($DL_DIR), allowing reuse instead of re-downloading
>> each time. The content downloaded for linux-yocto-3.0 is exactly what
>> would be pulled from the local repository if
>> I used a local clone of the git repository for linux-yocto-3.0.
>> * If my assumption above is correct, if I'm not modifying the
>> source code of the kernel (only changing config parameters), then
>> once you've run at least one build with the
>> tarball method, the $DL_DIR directory contains all the files
>> you'll need to build any image with linux-yocto-3.0. So there is no
>> need to have a local clone of the kernel
>> repository for speeding up development. Am I right?
>> * If I have a successful creation of a bare clone of
>> linux-yocto-3.0.git, how could builds of Edison packages be failing?
>> That makes me concerned about using git and successfully
>> repeating builds of stable branches like Edison.
>
> If you set BB_GENERATE_MIRROR_TARBALLS = "1" (e.g. in local.conf)
> then you'll get tarballs which hold the git repositories after
> download. You can then reuse these (by sharing the DL_DIR or
> using a local mirror). Does that help with the issue you're seeing?
>
I'm not sure it does. I don't want poky to do more work. I have my
download directory, $DL_DIR, outside my build directory so I can keep it
run to run, as mentioned in the comments in local.conf. I was trying to
understand 2 basic questions:
1. what could be causing build failures using a freshly created bare
clone yesterday vs. using the poky-edison-6.0 tarball. It would be
scary if you could clone the linux-yocto-3.0 successfully one day and
have it be used in a build successfully, but clone it another day and it
not work. I figured that bitbake/poky pulled the same information into
DL_DIR regardless of whether you pulled from the bare clone locally or
straight from the on-line repository.
2. I was trying to look at items to speed up build runs. I thought that
if the downloads in DL_DIR were reused if they existed, it would speed
up a run. It seems to. So the question is, after the first build, the
files I need for linux-yocto-3.0 are in DL_DIR regardless of whether
they came from the online repository or the local bare clone. right?
Jim A
More information about the yocto
mailing list