[oe] strange error when coding a bbclass

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 11:18 -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On 6/12/07, Richard Purdie <rpurdie at rpsys.net> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 16:49 -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> >
> > addtask inserts a dependency so if you add
> >
> > addtask blah before do_configure
> >
> > You are saying that say "patch" must run, followed by "blah" followed by
> > "configure". Bitbake will check the task dependencies and build them if
> > they're missing. If a subsequent task has a timestamp older than its
> > dependencies it will rerun them too (just on a per recipe basis at
> > present). There have been requests to extend that so if you rebuild gtk
> > +, all the gtk apps will rebuild and we will probably optionally allow
> > that in due course (it should be easy with the new bitbake core).
> 
> I've noticed that and it makes sense. What I really cannot understand
> is how a very simple function that does anything but a print can break
> that packages?

Try "bitbake busybox", then "bitbake busybox -c package -f". You will
find that either it will fail outright or the busybox packages will
become corrupt (empty). This is because install must always be (re)run
before package. I suspect you're seeing side-affects from that area of
breakage (and you're not the only one)...

Richard