[oe] OE breakages, was: Re: fakeroot fails to build

[Tom Rini]

On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 06:56:16PM +0100, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> 2009/2/27 Tom Rini <trini at kernel.crashing.org>:
> > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 05:06:25PM +0100, Leon Woestenberg wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Frans Meulenbroeks
> >> <fransmeulenbroeks at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On 25-02-09 16:14, Mike (mwester) wrote:
> >> >
> >> > The problem I am facing is somewhat different.
> >> > I've added packages which build and test fine in my environment but
> >> > for some reason they do not build properly on tinderbox.
> >> >
> >> That often indicates a leak to the host and/or missing DEPENDS.
> >>
> >> The build machines that run test builds, should do so with the minimal
> >> amount of host requirements.
> >>
> >> Easily testable using virtual machines with freshly installed Linux,
> >> as most machines grow their installed package base during their
> >> lifecycle.
> >
> > Also, chroots work for this.
> >
> 
> True but that is not what we have at the moment. E.g the mpd problem I
> mentioned earlier in this thread is probably caused by some docbook
> residue.
> 
> (and I agree that it is easy to miss a DEPENDS because of accumulated
> installed packages).

If you start with a very minimal chroot and an empty build output dir,
yes, you would catch these things.  I think scratchbox would help to
automate this kind of thing, but for my needs I simply unpack my chroot
base and go.

-- 
Tom Rini