On Wed, 2017-02-08 at 11:50 +0000, Mike Crowe wrote: > On Friday 13 January 2017 at 15:52:33 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > Having do_rm_work depend on do_build had one major disadvantage: > > do_build depends on the do_build of other recipes, to ensure that > > runtime dependencies also get built. The effect is that when work on a > > recipe is complete and it could get cleaned up, do_rm_work still > > doesn't run because it waits for those other recipes, thus leading to > > more temporary disk space usage than really needed. > > > > The right solution is to inject do_rm_work before do_build and after > > all tasks of the recipe. Achieving that depends on the new bitbake > > bb.event.RecipeTaskPreProcess and bb.build.preceedtask(). > > We've run into trouble with this change. We have a number of custom > ancillary tasks that are used to generate source release files and run > package tests. No other tasks (including do_build) depend on these tasks > since they are run explicitly when required using bitbake -c; either > directly or via a recrdeptask. > > Running a single task continues to work correctly - presumably this is > because the do_build task is not being run, so its dependencies (including > rm_work) aren't run either. > > Running via the recrdeptask fails. This is because for any particular > recipe we end up depending on both do_build and the source release tasks. > There's nothing to stop do_rm_work running before (or even during!) one of > the source release tasks.
Can you show how you use recrdeptask and how you call bitbake to trigger those extra tasks, just for my understanding? I suppose it worked before because your tasks could depend on do_build without triggering do_rm_work, while now that is included. > It seems that we need to ensure that do_rm_work also needs to depend on our > ancillary tasks too, but only if they are being built. I'm unsure how this > can be done though. :( How do you determine whether the tasks need to run? Does it depend on how bitbake is invoked or does it depend on specific properties of the recipe? -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
