From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 07DD9E00978; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 06:35:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] Received: from mail.chez-thomas.org (mail.mlbassoc.com [65.100.170.105]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31D47E00960 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 06:35:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail.chez-thomas.org (Postfix, from userid 1998) id 4806FF811D9; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 07:35:04 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [192.168.1.114] (zeus [192.168.1.114]) by mail.chez-thomas.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCA67F811D9; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 07:35:03 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <557ED498.50406@mlbassoc.com> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 07:35:20 -0600 From: Gary Thomas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yocto Project Subject: sstate black hole? X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 13:35:10 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm working with i.MX6 targets (meta-fsl-arm*). For these targets, some packages are "special" in that they use i.MX6 specific graphics support. This ends up with an additional layer of stratification, so my tmp/work tree has: all-amltd-linux cortexa9hf-vfp-neon-amltd-linux-gnueabi cortexa9hf-vfp-neon-mx6qdl-amltd-linux-gnueabi teton_p0382-amltd-linux-gnueabi x86_64-amltd-linux-gnueabi x86_64-linux The packages that are built in tmp/work/cortex* are architecture specific, not target specific, hence my question: If I build for two i.MX6 targets, identical in every way except for the ${MACHINE} name, if I use sstate to share the builds from target A when building for target B, why are the packages built in cortexa9hf-vfp-neon-mx6qdl-amltd-linux-gnueabi not shared by sstate? I can see that they are present in the sstate cache, but they are always rebuilt for target B. I consider this incorrect behaviour as these are the same architecture and so they should be sharable via sstate. Am I missing something here? How can I determine why the package from target A (sstate cache) is not usable by target B? -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Gary Thomas | Consulting for the MLB Associates | Embedded world ------------------------------------------------------------