[OE-core] sstate reuse for -native, -cross across different host glibc version, how to make it work?

[Richard Purdie]

On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 07:12 -0700, Chris Larson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 13:22 +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >> I turned on sstate mirroring for angstrom recently and I'm getting
> >> reports of build failures due to missing GLIBC_2.14 symbols:
> >>
> >> arm-angstrom-linux-gnueabi-gcc: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6:
> >> version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by
> >> arm-angstrom-linux-gnueabi-gcc)
> >>
> >> The sstate tarballs are built on a Fedora16 VM and the breakage occurs
> >> when it being used on systems with an older c library (e.g. debian).
> >> To get rid of this problem there are multiple options, but I think the
> >> 2 most obvious are:
> >>
> >> 1) inject host distroname and distroversion into the checksums
> >> 2) build everything against a native libc
> >>
> > 3) Use an older version on the VM which is the oldest distro you plan to
> > build against.
> >
> >> Would it be appropriate to get 1) into oe-core before the branchpoint?
> >
> > We've talked about this and its been on the "to fix" list but nobody has
> > got around to it. Its hard as we need to come up with something that
> > isn't going to kill performance of the checksum calculations. A cat
> > operation on a few files for each checksum for example isn't
> > appropriate. We may need to do something at the bitbake level as there
> > is also the issue of checksuming local files such as those in file://
> > urls and including that in the sstate checksums.
> >
> > So whilst I'd love to see fixes for these and they are bugfixes, they're
> > going to have to be well written patches and its late in cycle for
> > invasive changes :(.
> 
> At Mentor, right now, I'm using a ConfigParsed event handler to run
> lsb_release and inject the DISTRO/DISTRO_VERSION into the metadata,
> which I then use vardeps to ensure get into the appropriate
> signatures. Not perfect, but gets the job done.

Are those patches available anywhere we can look at?

Cheers,

Richard