RE: Is it safe to remove debconf cache files in isar system

[<Venkata.Pyla@toshiba-tsip.com>]

Hi,

Resending this question in cip-dev mailing list

Thanks,
Venkata.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: pyla venkata(ＴＳＩＰ)
>Sent: 16 December 2021 13:17
>To: isar-users@googlegroups.com
>Cc: henning.schild@siemens.com; Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>; dinesh
>kumar(ＴＳＩＰ) <dinesh.kumar@toshiba-tsip.com>; hayashi kazuhiro(林 和宏
>□ＳＷＣ◯ＡＣＴ) <kazuhiro3.hayashi@toshiba.co.jp>
>Subject: Is it safe to remove debconf cache files in isar system
>
>Hi,
>
>I am working to fix some reproducible build failures in isar system, as part of
>this I wanted to know some ideas to fix it.
>
>I am checking the reproducible failures as below:
> $ cd isar
> $ . isar-init-build-env build1 && bitbake mc:qemuamd64-buster-tgz:isar-image-
>base
> $ . isar-init-build-env build2 && bitbake mc:qemuamd64-buster-tgz:isar-image-
>base
> $ mkdir -p rootfs1 rootfs2
> $ tar -xzvf ./build1/tmp/deploy/images/qemuamd64/isar-image-base-debian-
>buster-qemuamd64.tar.gz -C ./rootfs1/  $ tar -xzvf
>./build2/tmp/deploy/images/qemuamd64/isar-image-base-debian-buster-
>qemuamd64.tar.gz -C ./rootfs2/  $ rsync -nrclv ./rootfs1/ ./rootfs2/ >
>difference.txt
>
>Below is one reproducible problem I picked:
>In debconf db file the contents were different after two subsequent builds,
>
>Part of the debconf db file where the difference is found
>(/var/cache/debconf/config.dat)
>Build1:
>Name: ucf/changeprompt
>Template: ucf/changeprompt
>Value: keep_current
>Owners: ucf
>Variables:
> BASENAME = locale.nopurge
> FILE = /etc/locale.nopurge
> NEW = /etc/locale.nopurge.29308
>
>Build2:
>Name: ucf/changeprompt
>Template: ucf/changeprompt
>Value: keep_current
>Owners: ucf
>Variables:
> BASENAME = locale.nopurge
> FILE = /etc/locale.nopurge
> NEW = /etc/locale.nopurge.19132
>
>The probable solution I am thinking of is:
>1. remove the debconf cache files (rm -f /var/cache/debconf/*)
>2. Fix the debconf in such a way it generates same package configuration on every build
>
>The first solution is easy, but I am worried if those package configuration files
>maybe required in future when the package is updating The second solution
>would need more investigation at debconf package side.
>
>Any ideas or suggestion would be very grateful.
>
>Thanks,
>Venkata.