Re: [PATCH 1/2] bitbake: ensure -f causes dependent tasks to be re-run

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 14:26 +0200, Björn Stenberg wrote:
> Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > Why do you want it to be producing the same checksum for potentially
> > different contents?
> 
> I don't. Sorry if that was unclear. I want:
> 
> a) That we don't need an -f option at all, i.e. that we have
> dependency tracking pinned down so well that any changed input
> automatically causes a rebuild and changed hash. (A boy can dream,
> can't he? :-), or

For what its worth I share the dream and in many ways we are working
towards it. There are a few things we still need to figure out to make
that possible without totally destroying performance but we're closer
than we ever have been.

This is also a reason I fought hard not to have a "cleansstate" task.
What would be the point of it? I did give in and let it in whilst
various fixes were made to sstate but I'd like to think we can remove it
at some point.

Cheers,

Richard