[yocto] Details on Bug #963 kernel tarball corruption.

2011-07-07 Thread Flanagan, Elizabeth
I wanted to ping the list on this bug as I've drilled down into it and I see what's going on. These are the steps to reproduce it and I have some questions at the end The issue: The autobuilder has been serving up bad kernel source tarballs. This is not an autobuilder issue. I've narrowed

Re: [yocto] Details on Bug #963 kernel tarball corruption.

2011-07-07 Thread Tom Zanussi
On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 13:34 -0700, Flanagan, Elizabeth wrote: I wanted to ping the list on this bug as I've drilled down into it and I see what's going on. These are the steps to reproduce it and I have some questions at the end The issue: The autobuilder has been serving up bad kernel

Re: [yocto] Details on Bug #963 kernel tarball corruption.

2011-07-07 Thread Flanagan, Elizabeth
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote: On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 13:34 -0700, Flanagan, Elizabeth wrote: Shouldn't this always be the state of DL_DIR i.e. any change made to the contents of SRC_URI be exactly reflected in the same thing in DL_DIR? If that were

Re: [yocto] Details on Bug #963 kernel tarball corruption.

2011-07-07 Thread Richard Purdie
On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 15:31 -0700, Flanagan, Elizabeth wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote: On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 13:34 -0700, Flanagan, Elizabeth wrote: Shouldn't this always be the state of DL_DIR i.e. any change made to the contents of SRC_URI

Re: [yocto] Details on Bug #963 kernel tarball corruption.

2011-07-07 Thread Darren Hart
On 07/07/2011 02:16 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 13:34 -0700, Flanagan, Elizabeth wrote: I wanted to ping the list on this bug as I've drilled down into it and I see what's going on. These are the steps to reproduce it and I have some questions at the end The issue: