From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id EA942E00978; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 06:58:59 -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=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low * trust * [193.201.172.119 listed in list.dnswl.org] * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (picmaster[at]mail.bg) * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature Received: from mx3.mail.bg (mx3.mail.bg [193.201.172.119]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52855E00960 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 06:58:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.62] (unknown [93.152.143.60]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx3.mail.bg (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 57EDB202C6BE; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 16:58:55 +0300 (EEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=mail.bg; s=default; t=1434376735; bh=fWxVv0zpTUvIIhnStDf/lRidn+b96/WN5wDVawllXHY=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=dzzd9aJOYhq7iPir8iDMHAeaJFVked/kqzHWlq+lBilX56oNd2jLW46cP18C4Q+ex qe+RA9xYHt9nWFNtURCZWzOhkn6URULvqEG7qHp0sCMbXsdPOPvVS8dd1o9JAPmR5q 3+U93Wqd1VSFWWPe8ApIbwBc02OLT6mcA78yFw4s= Message-ID: <557EDA1F.7010207@mail.bg> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 16:58:55 +0300 From: Nikolay Dimitrov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gary Thomas , Yocto Project References: <557ED498.50406@mlbassoc.com> In-Reply-To: <557ED498.50406@mlbassoc.com> Subject: Re: 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 13:59:00 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Gary, On 06/15/2015 04:35 PM, Gary Thomas wrote: > 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? Are these packages (the ones that are getting rebuilt) depending on machine-specific headers (kernel)? Regards, Nikolay