-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Optimize root fs build #110
Comments
I wonder if this will cover installation and reinstallation of -9999 ebuilds. If not, might be we can add support for them. Not sure how though. Right now I am ok with just rm the binary precompiled package. One day hopefully hooked into the commit history on jenkins. This project might be can have a hook to delete the 9999 package when a flag is set. Dunno for now. |
As a note. I have been trying |
With I typically have |
I hit the soname dep issue in builder/bob-musl with its I removed the packages cache and then on building bob-musl it emerged from source, and this time was linked to From what I can tell |
Full context: #99
emerge --usepkgonly --ignore-soname-deps=n ...
.emerge --usepkg ...
.emerge --usepkgonly --ignore-soname-deps=n ...
.emerge --usepkg --usepkg-exclude $atom ...
, where $atom is the main package likememcached
.emerge --usepkgonly --ignore-soname-deps=n ...
.10. Try emergy from source only:
emerge ...
(no--usepkg
)11. Try emerging binary packages only with soname dependency checking:
emerge --usepkgonly --ignore-soname-deps=n ...
.Essentially all binary packages would be created by installing at the build container root first, before using the created binary packages to populate the custom root. The tricky part is to only run the first install phase if a binary package does not exist yet.
I'll probably shoot for something simple first, i.e. just check if
--usepkgonly
throws an error and use that to decide if to run the first phase or not. Ideally this would be more fine grained as outlined by @berney, though that might be a bit much. While it would detect issues like with thatmemcached
version, it's probably rarely needed in practice, this was a bug in the memcached ebuild after all. So I'm not sure it is worth the increased complexity. We'll see.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: