On 2/27/20 9:01 AM, Joshua Watt wrote:
On 2/26/20 11:46 PM, Douglas Royds wrote:
On 26/02/20 4:53 am, Jacob Kroon wrote:
On 2/24/20 8:25 AM, Jacob Kroon wrote:
Hi Douglas,
You updated a comment in reproducible_build.bbclass, commit
e7b891b76954c784f5a93bd0a1c91315673ce40d:
-# Once the value of SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is determined, it is stored
in the recipe's ${SDE_FILE}.
+# Once the value of SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is determined, it is stored
in the recipe's SDE_FILE.
+# If none of these mechanisms are suitable, replace the
do_deploy_source_date_epoch task
+# with recipe-specific functionality to write the appropriate
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH into the SDE_FILE.
+#
But I can't really get this to work. What did work for me was to
replace "do_create_source_date_epoch_stamp()" in my recipe:
do_create_source_date_epoch_stamp() {
mkdir -p ${SDE_DIR}
date -d "1981-03-03" "+%s" > ${SDE_FILE}
}
What is the intended way to achieve the thing I'm trying to do here ?
FYI, JPEW has a proposed patch here
http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=jpew/reproducible&id=d091d2aa53ea417f70c10f5ce89151820c3db9ce
for allowing a recipe to just set SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH directly.
But maybe that currently is at odds with SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH being in
BB_HASHBASE_WHITELIST ?
/Jacob
On the surface of it, my comment appears to be just wrong: It does
make sense to replace do_create_source_date_epoch_stamp() as you suggest.
Joshua's proposed patch looks promising:
* Should the new function not be called first, so that it takes
priority over the git, known files, and youngest file functions?
If someone has explicitly set SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH, then they want
it to take priority.
Having that be the first option makes sense. The only case in which
that might not work, is if a recipe does something like:
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH = "${@my_awesome_sde_calculation(d)}"
e.g. uses a function to get the SDE instead of setting to a fixed
value, but that's probably going to be extremely rare.
*
* As you observe, SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH would need to be removed from
BB_HASHBASE_WHITELIST. I'm not sure why it was in the whitelist
in the first place.
I'm not sure why exactly it is whitelisted; I didn't write the
original code that whitelisted it, but I've CC'd Juro in case he
happens to remember.
After a discussion with Richard, we figured out why SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH
has to be whitelisted. The value of the variable *must* be calculable at
parse time before any task is ran, but in practice it's value is only
available once the __source_date_epoch.txt file is present, which is
after parsing. This causes the taskhash to be calculated differently
during parsing and task execution which causes taskhash mismatch errors.
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
