Dependency clarification for image classes with bitbake?


Heinz Wrobel
 

Hi,

 

I have some issues in sorting out dependency management for a custom image_types_*sdcard.bbclass and need some help/advice because the docs didn’t solve my problems.

 

As opposed to “normal” images where do_rootfs depends on the packages and do_image on do_rootfs and the image types on do_image, here we have extra do_image_sdcard[depends] for stuff outside the rootfs.

My do_image_sdcard[depends] currently references do_populate_sysroot and do_deploy of some other recipes and I have a empirical/paranoia recrdeptask on do_packagedata to mimic image.bbclass.

 

It appears now that bitbake only runs my do_image_sdcard task if the task hasn’t been run yet, no matter the state of the dependencies. It doesn’t seem to matter for do_image_sdcard if some do_image_sdcard[depends] dependency for that task is actually missing or newer.

If I, e.g., cleansstate such a dependency and then bitbake my image again, the dependency is rebuilt, but the image isn’t rebuilt because it already had been built before. A dependency build trigger downstream in the chain is not an execution trigger upstream.

 

So now I have an image that is outdated, because a necessary dependency is more recent.

This seems to be explained by the statement in the bitbake manual “Currently, invalid timestamps are only considered on a per recipe file basis.”, i.e., if recipe A depends on B, A is not rebuilt if A already exists, even if B is more recent than A.

 

For this simple case, I can fix it by cleansstate’ing the image and rebuilding it (or would it be enough to just clean the image?!).

 

But what concerns me now are more complex recipe dependencies. If I have A->B-><many>->Z and rebuild Z without knowing that A needs Z then a later “bitbake A” would do nothing. A and the interim dependencies are then outdated because bitbake wouldn’t execute on, e.g., C or B or A.

So unless I know the dependency chain manually I would always have to cleanall because I can never be sure that my image is outdated somewhere just because I rebuilt some recipe somewhere? That wouldn’t be efficient at all and kill most of the sstate usefulness.

Alternatively I would always have to “-f -c image_sdcard”, which also doesn’t exactly seem like a good approach because then the datestamps for the underlying images wouldn’t match anymore and the rootfs can’t be found?

 

It appears to me that I am missing something because this all just seems risky and so fundamental?

 

The obvious question is of course: Is there a reasonable way to ensure my image gets recreated by executing my do_image_sdcard if any dependency has a more recent timestamp than the current image?

 

Thanks,

 

Heinz