Andrew Geissler | 595f630 | 2022-01-24 19:11:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame^] | 1 | There are expectations of users of the fetcher code. This file attempts to document |
| 2 | some of the constraints that are present. Some are obvious, some are less so. It is |
| 3 | documented in the context of how OE uses it but the API calls are generic. |
| 4 | |
| 5 | a) network access for sources is only expected to happen in the do_fetch task. |
| 6 | This is not enforced or tested but is required so that we can: |
| 7 | |
| 8 | i) audit the sources used (i.e. for license/manifest reasons) |
| 9 | ii) support offline builds with a suitable cache |
| 10 | iii) allow work to continue even with downtime upstream |
| 11 | iv) allow for changes upstream in incompatible ways |
| 12 | v) allow rebuilding of the software in X years time |
| 13 | |
| 14 | b) network access is not expected in do_unpack task. |
| 15 | |
| 16 | c) you can take DL_DIR and use it as a mirror for offline builds. |
| 17 | |
| 18 | d) access to the network is only made when explicitly configured in recipes |
| 19 | (e.g. use of AUTOREV, or use of git tags which change revision). |
| 20 | |
| 21 | e) fetcher output is deterministic (i.e. if you fetch configuration XXX now it |
| 22 | will match in future exactly in a clean build with a new DL_DIR). |
| 23 | One specific pain point example are git tags. They can be replaced and change |
| 24 | so the git fetcher has to resolve them with the network. We use git revisions |
| 25 | where possible to avoid this and ensure determinism. |
| 26 | |
| 27 | f) network access is expected to work with the standard linux proxy variables |
| 28 | so that access behind firewalls works (the fetcher sets these in the |
| 29 | environment but only in the do_fetch tasks). |
| 30 | |
| 31 | g) access during parsing has to be minimal, a "git ls-remote" for an AUTOREV |
| 32 | git recipe might be ok but you can't expect to checkout a git tree. |
| 33 | |
| 34 | h) we need to provide revision information during parsing such that a version |
| 35 | for the recipe can be constructed. |
| 36 | |
| 37 | i) versions are expected to be able to increase in a way which sorts allowing |
| 38 | package feeds to operate (see PR server required for git revisions to sort). |
| 39 | |
| 40 | j) API to query for possible version upgrades of a url is highly desireable to |
| 41 | allow our automated upgrage code to function (it is implied this does always |
| 42 | have network access). |
| 43 | |
| 44 | k) Where fixes or changes to behaviour in the fetcher are made, we ask that |
| 45 | test cases are added (run with "bitbake-selftest bb.tests.fetch"). We do |
| 46 | have fairly extensive test coverage of the fetcher as it is the only way |
| 47 | to track all of its corner cases, it still doesn't give entire coverage |
| 48 | though sadly. |
| 49 | |
| 50 | l) If using tools during parse time, they will have to be in ASSUME_PROVIDED |
| 51 | in OE's context as we can't build git-native, then parse a recipe and use |
| 52 | git ls-remote. |
| 53 | |
| 54 | Not all fetchers support all features, autorev is optional and doesn't make |
| 55 | sense for some. Upgrade detection means different things in different contexts |
| 56 | too. |
| 57 | |