4bca6762e5
The changes of 1ab1d36c0af6fc58a974106b61ff4d37da6cb229 added calls to "gsutil stat" to avoid unhandled exceptions, however: - in the case of checkstatus() this is redundant with the call to self.gcp_client.bucket(ud.host).blob(path).exists() which already returns True/False and does not throw an exception in case the file does not exist. - Also the call to gsutil stat is much slower than using the python client to call exists() so we should not replace the call to exists() with a call to gsutil stat. - I think the intent of calling check_network_access in checkstatus() was to error-out in case the error is disabled. We can rather change the string "gsutil stat" to something else to make the code more readable. - add a try/except block in download() instead of the extra call to gsutil [RP: Tweak to avoid import until needed so google module isn't required for everyone] (Bitbake rev: 59df5390381792aba4f3f5185000adf5109267fb) Signed-off-by: Etienne Cordonnier <ecordonnier@snap.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Steve Sakoman <steve@sakoman.com>
There are expectations of users of the fetcher code. This file attempts to document some of the constraints that are present. Some are obvious, some are less so. It is documented in the context of how OE uses it but the API calls are generic.
a) network access for sources is only expected to happen in the do_fetch task. This is not enforced or tested but is required so that we can:
i) audit the sources used (i.e. for license/manifest reasons) ii) support offline builds with a suitable cache iii) allow work to continue even with downtime upstream iv) allow for changes upstream in incompatible ways v) allow rebuilding of the software in X years time
b) network access is not expected in do_unpack task.
c) you can take DL_DIR and use it as a mirror for offline builds.
d) access to the network is only made when explicitly configured in recipes (e.g. use of AUTOREV, or use of git tags which change revision).
e) fetcher output is deterministic (i.e. if you fetch configuration XXX now it will match in future exactly in a clean build with a new DL_DIR). One specific pain point example are git tags. They can be replaced and change so the git fetcher has to resolve them with the network. We use git revisions where possible to avoid this and ensure determinism.
f) network access is expected to work with the standard linux proxy variables so that access behind firewalls works (the fetcher sets these in the environment but only in the do_fetch tasks).
g) access during parsing has to be minimal, a "git ls-remote" for an AUTOREV git recipe might be ok but you can't expect to checkout a git tree.
h) we need to provide revision information during parsing such that a version for the recipe can be constructed.
i) versions are expected to be able to increase in a way which sorts allowing package feeds to operate (see PR server required for git revisions to sort).
j) API to query for possible version upgrades of a url is highly desireable to allow our automated upgrage code to function (it is implied this does always have network access).
k) Where fixes or changes to behaviour in the fetcher are made, we ask that test cases are added (run with "bitbake-selftest bb.tests.fetch"). We do have fairly extensive test coverage of the fetcher as it is the only way to track all of its corner cases, it still doesn't give entire coverage though sadly.
l) If using tools during parse time, they will have to be in ASSUME_PROVIDED in OE's context as we can't build git-native, then parse a recipe and use git ls-remote.
Not all fetchers support all features, autorev is optional and doesn't make sense for some. Upgrade detection means different things in different contexts too.