<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/27/20 3:22 PM, Douglas Royds
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:baae3c8f-219f-03eb-6f6c-a488ae22230b@taitradio.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<p>On 28/02/20 5:45 am, Joshua Watt wrote: </p>
<blockquote type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/27/20 9:01 AM, Joshua Watt
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:cce62b8e-b135-6daa-0c47-3e91955d248c@gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/26/20 11:46 PM, Douglas
Royds wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:0319e121-7546-e456-50d6-4b224e87363f@taitradio.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<p>On 26/02/20 4:53 am, Jacob Kroon wrote: </p>
<blockquote type="cite">On 2/24/20 8:25 AM, Jacob Kroon
wrote: <br>
<blockquote type="cite">Hi Douglas, <br>
<br>
You updated a comment in reproducible_build.bbclass,
commit e7b891b76954c784f5a93bd0a1c91315673ce40d: <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">-# Once the value of
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is determined, it is stored in the
recipe's ${SDE_FILE}. <br>
+# Once the value of SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is determined,
it is stored in the recipe's SDE_FILE. <br>
+# If none of these mechanisms are suitable, replace
the do_deploy_source_date_epoch task <br>
+# with recipe-specific functionality to write the
appropriate SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH into the SDE_FILE. <br>
+# <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
But I can't really get this to work. What did work for
me was to replace "do_create_source_date_epoch_stamp()"
in my recipe: <br>
<br>
do_create_source_date_epoch_stamp() { <br>
mkdir -p ${SDE_DIR} <br>
date -d "1981-03-03" "+%s" > ${SDE_FILE} <br>
} <br>
<br>
What is the intended way to achieve the thing I'm trying
to do here ? <br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
FYI, JPEW has a proposed patch here <br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=jpew/reproducible&id=d091d2aa53ea417f70c10f5ce89151820c3db9ce"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=jpew/reproducible&id=d091d2aa53ea417f70c10f5ce89151820c3db9ce</a>
<br>
<br>
for allowing a recipe to just set SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH
directly. <br>
<br>
But maybe that currently is at odds with SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH
being in BB_HASHBASE_WHITELIST ? <br>
<br>
/Jacob <br>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>On the surface of it, my comment appears to be just
wrong: It does make sense to replace
do_create_source_date_epoch_stamp() as you suggest.</p>
<p>Joshua's proposed patch looks promising:</p>
<ul>
<li>Should the new function not be called first, so that
it takes priority over the git, known files, and
youngest file functions? If someone has explicitly set
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH, then they want it to take priority.<br>
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p>Having that be the first option makes sense. The only case
in which that might not work, is if a recipe does something
like:</p>
<p> SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH = "${@my_awesome_sde_calculation(d)}"</p>
<p>e.g. uses a function to get the SDE instead of setting to a
fixed value, but that's probably going to be extremely rare.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:0319e121-7546-e456-50d6-4b224e87363f@taitradio.com">
<ul>
<li> <br>
</li>
<li>As you observe, SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH would need to be
removed from BB_HASHBASE_WHITELIST. I'm not sure why it
was in the whitelist in the first place.<br>
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p>I'm not sure why exactly it is whitelisted; I didn't write
the original code that whitelisted it, but I've CC'd Juro in
case he happens to remember.<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>After a discussion with Richard, we figured out why
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH has to be whitelisted. The value of the
variable *must* be calculable at parse time before any task is
ran, but in practice it's value is only available once the
__source_date_epoch.txt file is present, which is after
parsing. This causes the taskhash to be calculated differently
during parsing and task execution which causes taskhash
mismatch errors.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>True.</p>
<p>What to do? Would it work to use a different non-whitelisted
variable in the recipe, eg. SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH_FIXED?<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Ya, that would work. You'd have to figure out how to get the
variable to be included in each taskhash even though it's not
directly referenced, but I'm sure that's possible.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Another option that's at lot more "magic" would be something like
this:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=jpew/reproducible&id=2b524916cf35238ff3deea34017e8a4cd73926cd">http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=jpew/reproducible&id=2b524916cf35238ff3deea34017e8a4cd73926cd</a>
<br>
</p>
<p>That's really weird, and I'm not sure I like it, but worth a
thought.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>