On 29/09/13 18:37, Stuart Hughes wrote: > > > On 25/09/13 02:33, Mike Goins wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 9:14 PM, Mike Goins <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I'm having a bit of an issue with understanding a bit of logic with >>> preconfig and dir builds. >>> >>> A kernel is under dir build. >>> Kernel preconfig gets updated through version control. >>> ltib runs and outputs this: >>> >>> Processing: kernel-3.9.11-mpc8377 >>> ============================================ >>> Build path taken because: preconfig linux-3.9.11-mpc8377.config newer >>> than rpm, directory build, >>> checking if sources have been updated: no >>> ... >>> goes to rest of packages without building the kernel. >>> >>> >>> It looks as if ltib detected that the preconfig is newer, but doesn't >>> force the re-build of the package, like dir build takes precedence >>> over preconfig. I don't have PKG_KERNEL_FORCE selected, and thought >>> it a bit heavy handed. Shouldn't the newer preconfig auto-trigger a >>> force rebuild? >>> >>> It does appear that setting PKG_KERNEL_FORCE, would do it, but this is >>> such an expensive operation, when 99% of the time it is not needed >>> (I'd rather not trigger the kernel build counter unless something >>> actually changed). >> >> >> Possibly answering my own question: >> >> Index: ltib >> =================================================================== >> RCS file: /sources/ltib/ltib/ltib,v >> retrieving revision 1.89 >> diff -u -r1.89 ltib >> --- ltib 20 Oct 2012 14:05:42 -0000 1.89 >> +++ ltib 25 Sep 2013 01:30:53 -0000 >> @@ -831,7 +831,7 @@ >> # don't do this clause if running in short-circuited mode >> if( $unpack eq 'yes' ) { >> # commit to installing a new rpm (enforced if build fails) >> - unlink(@rpms) if $cf->{force} || $$key->{build} || $spec_upd; >> + unlink(@rpms) if $cf->{force} || $$key->{build} || >> $spec_upd || $preconfig_bld; >> >> foreach my $url ( split(/\s*\n/, $tok->{sources}), >> split(/\s*\n/, $tok->{patches}) ) { >> > > Hi Mike, > > I took a look at the code and tried out your patch. It looks good to > me, please check-in. > > Regards, Stuart > >
Hi Mike, Rather than let it get lost I checked in the above change. Regards, Stuart _______________________________________________ LTIB home page: http://ltib.org Ltib mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/ltib
