Skip to content

ci: use OEBasicHash fallback when HASHSERV is unavailable - #16626

Merged
rpcme merged 1 commit into
master-nextfrom
fix/hashserv-oebasichash-fallback
Aug 9, 2026
Merged

rpcme merged 1 commit into
master-nextfrom
fix/hashserv-oebasichash-fallback

Conversation

@rpcme

@rpcme rpcme commented Aug 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Problem

After PR #16625 fixed the shell quoting, the if block correctly evaluates to false for fork PRs. However, modern OE-core master enables OEEquivHash by default. Without explicit BB_HASHSERVE, bitbake falls back to a local sqlite DB which fails on the CI NFS-mounted sstate-cache:

ERROR: Hash equivalency database location (set via BB_HASHSERVE_DB_DIR to /sstate-cache)
cannot be on a NFS mount due to potential NFS locking issues between sqlite clients

Fix

Add an else branch that explicitly sets BB_SIGNATURE_HANDLER = "OEBasicHash" to disable hash equivalence entirely for fork PRs.

  • Internal PRs: OEEquivHash + remote hashserv (fast, sstate sharing)
  • Fork PRs: OEBasicHash (no hash equivalence, slower but functional)

Unblocks #16292.

Modern OE-core master enables OEEquivHash by default. When we don't
set BB_HASHSERVE (fork PRs where vars context is empty), bitbake
falls back to a local sqlite-based hash equivalency DB. This fails
on the CI runner because /sstate-cache is an NFS mount:

  ERROR: Hash equivalency database location (BB_HASHSERVE_DB_DIR=/sstate-cache)
  cannot be on a NFS mount due to potential NFS locking issues

Fix: explicitly set BB_SIGNATURE_HANDLER = "OEBasicHash" in the else
branch to fully disable hash equivalence for fork PRs. Internal PRs
continue using OEEquivHash with the remote hashserv.
@rpcme
rpcme requested a review from a team as a code owner August 9, 2026 16:34
@rpcme
rpcme merged commit 2f501f9 into master-next Aug 9, 2026
7 of 11 checks passed
@rpcme
rpcme deleted the fix/hashserv-oebasichash-fallback branch August 9, 2026 16:36
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant