From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.windriver.com (mail.windriver.com [147.11.1.11]) by mx1.pokylinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC4774C80039 for ; Fri, 3 Dec 2010 13:15:42 -0600 (CST) Received: from ALA-MAIL03.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-mail03 [147.11.57.144]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oB3JFZSd003954; Fri, 3 Dec 2010 11:15:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from ala-mail06.corp.ad.wrs.com ([147.11.57.147]) by ALA-MAIL03.corp.ad.wrs.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 3 Dec 2010 11:15:34 -0800 Received: from [128.224.146.67] ([128.224.146.67]) by ala-mail06.corp.ad.wrs.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 3 Dec 2010 11:15:35 -0800 Message-ID: <4CF941D5.5030407@windriver.com> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:15:33 -0500 From: Bruce Ashfield User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9pre) Gecko/20100217 Shredder/3.0.3pre ThunderBrowse/3.2.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Xianghua Xiao References: <8A929EC0-8AF1-48BB-ACD4-9D38C8F72DCD@jonmasters.org><1291399287.16321.18.camel@feynman.coloradoengineeringinc.com><20101203184643.GW10755@ibawizard.net> In-Reply-To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2010 19:15:35.0142 (UTC) FILETIME=[76311060:01CB931E] Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org, beagleboard@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [beagleboard] Yocto X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2010 19:15:43 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 10-12-03 02:11 PM, Xianghua Xiao wrote: > On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Petr Štetiar wrote: >> Michael J. Hammel [2010-12-03 11:01:27]: >> >> Hi, >> >>> I've heard of Yocto only in passing. I'm assuming it's another >>> bitbake-based metabuild system? Is there some reasoning why >>> Meego/Linaro/OpenEmbedded/Angstrom/Custom Builds cannot fill the >>> requirements of Yocto? I don't mean that harshly at all - I'm just >>> curious about the evolution and true target audiences of these projects. >>> It's nice to have choices, but developers should have some idea of the >>> differences so they can choose wisely when just starting. >> >> Richard wrote nice summary[1], it's worth reading and it might answer your >> questions as well :-) >> >> 1. http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2010-November/026598.html >> >> -- ynezz >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Beagle Board" group. >> To post to this group, send email to beagleboard@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to beagleboard+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/beagleboard?hl=en. >> >> > > May we know roughly how many paid resources are behind Yocto? > > Which arch will be first officially supported? Will it be ATOM as Poky > is really part of Intel? Beagle/ARM will be done by the community > instead? I can provide some answers for this part of the query. In the 0.9 release, we already support the following arches: - x86(64), mips, arm and powerpc These are all based on a 2.6.34 kernel base (with an option for 2.6.37-rcX shortly). There are simulated targets for each arch, and a hardware reference for each as well (for ARM the reference hardware is the beagleboard). Hope that helps, Bruce > > Thanks, > Xianghua > _______________________________________________ > yocto mailing list > yocto@yoctoproject.org > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto