[bitbake-devel] [PATCH] fetch2/git: always use premirror first if update is required

[Christopher Larson]

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:22 AM, Pascal Bach <pascal.bach at siemens.com>
wrote:

> On 16.09.2016 18:20, Christopher Larson wrote:
>
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 1:58 AM, Pascal Bach <pascal.bach at siemens.com
> <mailto:pascal.bach at siemens.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     When an update of the local copy is required always try to fetch the
> update
> >     from a premirror first.
> >     The premirror should always have precedence over the upstream
> repository
> >     as updating from there might not work if BB_FETCH_PREMIRRORONLY,
> >     BB_NO_NBB_ALLOWED_NETWORKS or BB_NO_NETWORK is set.
> >
> >     This also gets rid of the special case for BB_FETCH_PREMIRRORONLY.
> >
> >     Signed-off-by: Pascal Bach <pascal.bach at siemens.com <mailto:
> pascal.bach at siemens.com>>
> >     ---
> >      lib/bb/fetch2/git.py | 9 ++-------
> >      1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> >     diff --git a/lib/bb/fetch2/git.py b/lib/bb/fetch2/git.py
> >     index 1bec60a..cac2a87 100644
> >     --- a/lib/bb/fetch2/git.py
> >     +++ b/lib/bb/fetch2/git.py
> >     @@ -227,13 +227,8 @@ class Git(FetchMethod):
> >              return False
> >
> >          def try_premirror(self, ud, d):
> >     -        # If we don't do this, updating an existing checkout with
> only premirrors
> >     -        # is not possible
> >     -        if d.getVar("BB_FETCH_PREMIRRORONLY", True) is not None:
> >     -            return True
> >     -        if os.path.exists(ud.clonedir):
> >     -            return False
> >     -        return True
> >     +        # Always try premirror if an update is required
> >     +        return self.need_update(ud, d)
> >
> >
> > Will this result in fetching a mirror tarball even if you already have a
> clone in ud.clonedir? The previous logic always returned False if the
> clonedir existed..
> The tarball should only be fetched if the local ud.clonedir is out of
> date, this means the revision that is requested via SRCREV is not in the
> local repository.
> In the case the revision is present the tarball should not be fetched
> again, at least that was the intention and my local tests didn't indicate
> otherwise.
>

Yes, but it’s better to run ‘git fetch’ in an out of date clone than to
re-download a 1gb mirror tarball which may well be out of date too.
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/bitbake-devel/attachments/20160919/710612ff/attachment-0002.html>