Machine config generator (FOSDEM idea)

Machine config generator (FOSDEM idea)

[Marcin Juszkiewicz]

Hi

I was talking during FOSDEM with some developers and one of things which 
I was asked about was 'how to create machine config' (usually question 
was other but had this sense).

OE developers usually know that machine config is simple but tell that 
to Joe Random who only knows that his board use s3c2443 etc. So idea was 
to create simple few steps wizard which will ask few questions and 
produce machine config as result. More work would be required on 
creating kernel recipe because kernel can be from svn/cvs/git or tarball 
+ quilt patchset etc...

Thats only beginning of idea - I hope that someone will provide 
feedback.

Regards, 
-- 
JID:      hrw@jabber.org
Website:  http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz

Re: Machine config generator (FOSDEM idea)

[Ken Gilmer]

Sounds like something I'd also like to add to OTE...

thx
ken


On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 15:25 +0100, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I was talking during FOSDEM with some developers and one of things which 
> I was asked about was 'how to create machine config' (usually question 
> was other but had this sense).
> 
> OE developers usually know that machine config is simple but tell that 
> to Joe Random who only knows that his board use s3c2443 etc. So idea was 
> to create simple few steps wizard which will ask few questions and 
> produce machine config as result. More work would be required on 
> creating kernel recipe because kernel can be from svn/cvs/git or tarball 
> + quilt patchset etc...
> 
> Thats only beginning of idea - I hope that someone will provide 
> feedback.
> 
> Regards, 

Re: Machine config generator (FOSDEM idea)

[Sledz, Steffen]

> I was talking during FOSDEM with some developers and one of 
> things which 
> I was asked about was 'how to create machine config' (usually 
> question 
> was other but had this sense).
> 
> OE developers usually know that machine config is simple but 
> tell that 
> to Joe Random who only knows that his board use s3c2443 etc. 
> So idea was 
> to create simple few steps wizard which will ask few questions and 
> produce machine config as result. More work would be required on 
> creating kernel recipe because kernel can be from svn/cvs/git 
> or tarball 
> + quilt patchset etc...

A good start could be <http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Adding_a_new_Machine>.

This is also the place where i would like to see the results of this discussion. :)

Steffen

Re: Machine config generator (FOSDEM idea)

[Ulf Samuelsson]

>
> Hi
>
> I was talking during FOSDEM with some developers and one of things which
> I was asked about was 'how to create machine config' (usually question
> was other but had this sense).
>
> OE developers usually know that machine config is simple but tell that
> to Joe Random who only knows that his board use s3c2443 etc. So idea was
> to create simple few steps wizard which will ask few questions and
> produce machine config as result. More work would be required on
> creating kernel recipe because kernel can be from svn/cvs/git or tarball
> + quilt patchset etc...
>
> Thats only beginning of idea - I hope that someone will provide
> feedback.
>

Yes, this is one of two major drawbacks of OpenEmbedded.
The second beeing buildtime.

Should it be possible to use KConfig?

For Buildroot, I have generated a Config.in which
allows you to specify any kernel version from 2.6.22 and onwards.
You can apply any minor patch, -mm patch or -rc-# patch.
You can also apply an architecture or board specific patch
as well as a named patch from the download directory.

When you apply an architecture specific patch, you have a list
of patches to select from so you could apply the 2.6.17.6 patches
on top of 2.6.17.12.

Would be good to be able to download a patchset as well, but this is not yet 
supported.

Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson

> Regards,
> -- 
> JID:      hrw@jabber.org
> Website:  http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
> 

Re: Machine config generator (FOSDEM idea)

[Yuri Bushmelev]

Hello!
> OE developers usually know that machine config is simple but tell that
> to Joe Random who only knows that his board use s3c2443 etc. So idea was
> to create simple few steps wizard which will ask few questions and
> produce machine config as result. More work would be required on
> creating kernel recipe because kernel can be from svn/cvs/git or tarball
> + quilt patchset etc...

We still needed defconfig's management tool :)
Now for make new kernel recipe creating easier (e.g. by selecting known 
devices and drivers).

-- 
Yuri Bushmelev

Re: Machine config generator (FOSDEM idea)

[Otavio Salvador]

Marcin Juszkiewicz <openembedded@haerwu.biz> writes:

> Hi
>
> I was talking during FOSDEM with some developers and one of things which 
> I was asked about was 'how to create machine config' (usually question 
> was other but had this sense).
>
> OE developers usually know that machine config is simple but tell that 
> to Joe Random who only knows that his board use s3c2443 etc. So idea was 
> to create simple few steps wizard which will ask few questions and 
> produce machine config as result. More work would be required on 
> creating kernel recipe because kernel can be from svn/cvs/git or tarball 
> + quilt patchset etc...
>
> Thats only beginning of idea - I hope that someone will provide 
> feedback.

I see the pros for it but I also think it will not help too much; the
most difficult problem is to understand OE as a whole and how the
packages can affect each other.

It takes a while to identify the failures and to cook up a fix for those
problems.

What will be the use of a machine definition without a kernel config for
it? And let's be real, if the person knows how to compile the kernel for
it then I'm absolute sure that the machine definition won't be problem.

What I do think could be useful is a more detailed set of "Quick Start
Guide" having one for each really common task. The set of tasks I
believe are common for regular users are:

 - adding a new package version
 - adding a new package
 - creating a distribution based in another
 - adding a new machine

This small set solves 90% of problems people usually have and as a plus
help the end user to understand OE in more deep; as a bonus we can end
up having more people giving back the generated changes.

My 2c.

-- 
        O T A V I O    S A L V A D O R
---------------------------------------------
 E-mail: otavio@debian.org      UIN: 5906116
 GNU/Linux User: 239058     GPG ID: 49A5F855
 Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br
---------------------------------------------
"Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives
 you the whole house."

Re: Machine config generator (FOSDEM idea)

[Phil Blundell]

On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 15:25 +0100, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> OE developers usually know that machine config is simple but tell that 
> to Joe Random who only knows that his board use s3c2443 etc. So idea was 
> to create simple few steps wizard which will ask few questions and 
> produce machine config as result. More work would be required on 
> creating kernel recipe because kernel can be from svn/cvs/git or tarball 
> + quilt patchset etc...

This seems like it's really a documentation problem.  It's hard to see
that the wizard would be able to perform any useful, non-trivial
processing of its own: it'd basically just be taking the information
from the user and regurgitating it in a slightly different format.

If users are finding it hard to figure out how to create a machine
description then the right answer is probably a wiki page or a chapter
in the manual that explains in small words how to do it.

p.

Re: Machine config generator (FOSDEM idea)

[GNUtoo]

On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 16:21 +0000, Phil Blundell wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 15:25 +0100, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> > OE developers usually know that machine config is simple but tell that 
> > to Joe Random who only knows that his board use s3c2443 etc. So idea was 
> > to create simple few steps wizard which will ask few questions and 
> > produce machine config as result. More work would be required on 
> > creating kernel recipe because kernel can be from svn/cvs/git or tarball 
> > + quilt patchset etc...
> 
> This seems like it's really a documentation problem.  It's hard to see
> that the wizard would be able to perform any useful, non-trivial
> processing of its own: it'd basically just be taking the information
> from the user and regurgitating it in a slightly different format.
> 
> If users are finding it hard to figure out how to create a machine
> description then the right answer is probably a wiki page or a chapter
> in the manual that explains in small words how to do it.
Sorry for bumping this old thread but I just remembered that I didn't
respond to this thread yet
Maybe most of the machine that can be added already run some sort of
GNU/Linux,with another toolchain/build environment  such as the vendor
provided toolchain/build environment.
So an easy solution for the user would be to make some shell script that
would run on the device and gather all necessary data.
But there may be some problem such as:
*what if there is no tune file for the CPU
*I had the case[1] where a 2.6.10 kernel was given,but no omap-2.6.10
kernel could be found and it had to be diffed against a full 2.6.10
kernel...not very efficient(specially for porting the driver to a more
recent omap kernel)
*The developers may want to exploit the full capabilities of the machine
that are only available with proprietary distributions,and/or to stay
close to the original distribution:
That can happen if the device is a consumer product and has proprietary
things in userland...for Instance I have a pma430 that has a modified
qtopia that gives you the tv-out feature(at least that's what I remember
of what I was told).That implies a custom distribution with an external
toolchain.

[1] The device was an Archos 605 and I would have added it in oe if I
had bought it(unlockable version) but I didn't because It had to be
unlocked by the developers themselves(they don't want to spread the
unlocker because they want to stay in good therm with Archos(They know
people working at Archos) ),which is complicated for me because I have
to send the unit to a developer.
The fact that it had a 2.6.10 kernel also stopped me from buying
it(2.6.10=>no arm-eabi)