meta-ti?????

meta-ti?????

[Jim Abernathy]

I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a lot 
to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.

Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and 
meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard BPS?

Jim A

Re: meta-ti?????

[Chris Larson]

On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Jim Abernathy <jfabernathy@gmail.com> wrote:
> I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a lot to
> get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
>
> Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
> meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard BPS?

http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/LayerIndex
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics

Re: meta-ti?????

[Koen Kooi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 525 bytes --]


Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:

> I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a lot to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
> 
> Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard BPS?

http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/

It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it precisely.

[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 169 bytes --]

Re: meta-ti?????

[Paul Eggleton]

On Friday 23 December 2011 09:28:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:
> > I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a lot
> > to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
> > 
> > Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
> > meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard
> > BPS?
> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/
> 
> It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it
> precisely.

Just out of interest, why does meta-texasinstruments depend on meta-angstrom?

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: meta-ti?????

[Koen Kooi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 840 bytes --]


Op 23 dec. 2011, om 09:37 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:

> On Friday 23 December 2011 09:28:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
>> Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:
>>> I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a lot
>>> to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
>>> 
>>> Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
>>> meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard
>>> BPS?
>> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/
>> 
>> It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it
>> precisely.
> 
> Just out of interest, why does meta-texasinstruments depend on meta-angstrom?

It needs extra things in overrides and reuses tasks from there.

[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 169 bytes --]

Re: meta-ti?????

[James Abernathy]

On Dec 23, 2011, at 3:50 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:

> 
> Op 23 dec. 2011, om 09:37 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
> 
>> On Friday 23 December 2011 09:28:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
>>> Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:
>>>> I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a lot
>>>> to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
>>>> 
>>>> Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
>>>> meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard
>>>> BPS?
>>> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/
>>> 
>>> It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it
>>> precisely.
>> 
>> Just out of interest, why does meta-texasinstruments depend on meta-angstrom?
> 
> It needs extra things in overrides and reuses tasks from there.

Sorry for the follow-up, but if I clone the meta-texasinstruments bsp repository and checkout the pandaboard-rework branch,
how does that relate to the Yocto branch/bsp yocto/standard/pandaboard on the Yocto site?

Being a Yocto newbie, it's hard enough to understand all the branches on the yocto site. Relating the meta-angstrom is confusing.

The light bulb has now gone on yet :-)

Jim A

> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: meta-ti?????

[Koen Kooi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1580 bytes --]


Op 23 dec. 2011, om 14:10 heeft James Abernathy het volgende geschreven:

> 
> On Dec 23, 2011, at 3:50 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Op 23 dec. 2011, om 09:37 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
>> 
>>> On Friday 23 December 2011 09:28:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>> Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:
>>>>> I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a lot
>>>>> to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
>>>>> meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard
>>>>> BPS?
>>>> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/
>>>> 
>>>> It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it
>>>> precisely.
>>> 
>>> Just out of interest, why does meta-texasinstruments depend on meta-angstrom?
>> 
>> It needs extra things in overrides and reuses tasks from there.
> 
> Sorry for the follow-up, but if I clone the meta-texasinstruments bsp repository and checkout the pandaboard-rework branch,
> how does that relate to the Yocto branch/bsp yocto/standard/pandaboard on the Yocto site?

It doesn't. 

> Being a Yocto newbie, it's hard enough to understand all the branches on the yocto site. Relating the meta-angstrom is confusing.

No, yocto (or is it poky? noone knows) has confusing messaging, It's best to find the official BSP for the board you use and follow the instructions in there and ignore anything else.

[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 169 bytes --]

Re: meta-ti?????

[Paul Eggleton]

On Friday 23 December 2011 14:23:53 Koen Kooi wrote:
> > Being a Yocto newbie, it's hard enough to understand all the branches on
> > the yocto site. Relating the meta-angstrom is confusing.
>
> No, yocto (or is it poky? noone knows) 

Officially, Poky is the build system, Yocto is the umbrella project which also 
includes a number of other sub-projects (swabber, pseudo, etc.). There are 
some that use Yocto to refer to the build system; I'm not sure that does a 
great deal of harm nor is it really relevant to this discussion.

> has confusing messaging, It's best to
> find the official BSP for the board you use and follow the instructions in
> there and ignore anything else.

Personally I think this is a bit disappointing. The Yocto Project and the move 
to OE-Core is supposed to provide us a way to mix and match hardware support 
with available software packages. The apparent tying of meta-texasinstruments 
to meta-angstrom goes against that philosophy, IMHO. I haven't yet heard a 
compelling technical argument for why that should be necessary.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: meta-ti?????

[Philip Balister]

On 12/23/2011 08:43 AM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Friday 23 December 2011 14:23:53 Koen Kooi wrote:
>>> Being a Yocto newbie, it's hard enough to understand all the branches on
>>> the yocto site. Relating the meta-angstrom is confusing.
>>
>> No, yocto (or is it poky? noone knows) 
> 
> Officially, Poky is the build system, Yocto is the umbrella project which also 
> includes a number of other sub-projects (swabber, pseudo, etc.). There are 
> some that use Yocto to refer to the build system; I'm not sure that does a 
> great deal of harm nor is it really relevant to this discussion.
> 
>> has confusing messaging, It's best to
>> find the official BSP for the board you use and follow the instructions in
>> there and ignore anything else.
> 
> Personally I think this is a bit disappointing. The Yocto Project and the move 
> to OE-Core is supposed to provide us a way to mix and match hardware support 
> with available software packages. The apparent tying of meta-texasinstruments 
> to meta-angstrom goes against that philosophy, IMHO. I haven't yet heard a 
> compelling technical argument for why that should be necessary.

BSP's shoudl contain image recipes that create useful images for the
hardware. Images often tend to contain distro specific bits and pieces.
This leads to this sort of (problematic) dependencies between layers.

This is good area for further study since the problem will likely
increase without careful thought. I'd also suggest not depending on the
BSP guys to do this, since I suspect their corporate overlords care more
about the output and customer satisfaction then internal "details".

Philip

Re: meta-ti?????

[Philip Balister]

On 12/23/2011 08:10 AM, James Abernathy wrote:
> 
> On Dec 23, 2011, at 3:50 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> 
>>
>> Op 23 dec. 2011, om 09:37 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> On Friday 23 December 2011 09:28:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>> Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:
>>>>> I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a lot
>>>>> to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
>>>>> meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard
>>>>> BPS?
>>>> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/
>>>>
>>>> It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it
>>>> precisely.
>>>
>>> Just out of interest, why does meta-texasinstruments depend on meta-angstrom?
>>
>> It needs extra things in overrides and reuses tasks from there.
> 
> Sorry for the follow-up, but if I clone the meta-texasinstruments bsp repository and checkout the pandaboard-rework branch,
> how does that relate to the Yocto branch/bsp yocto/standard/pandaboard on the Yocto site?
> 
> Being a Yocto newbie, it's hard enough to understand all the branches on the yocto site. Relating the meta-angstrom is confusing.
> 
> The light bulb has now gone on yet :-)

I would guess the panda support in the Yocto BSP branch are there to
show Yocto (a word with many different meanings to different people) can
build stuff for non-Intel hardware. However if I were building for a
Panda, I would use the meta-texas-instruments stuff because I would
expect it to support all the bits of hardware (3D etc) available on the
Pandaboard.

The Panda and Beagleboards are readily available so they make good
demonstration cases for BSP's, but enabling all the features on these
SoC's is a lot more work.

Philip

Re: meta-ti?????

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 11-12-23 08:10 AM, James Abernathy wrote:
>
> On Dec 23, 2011, at 3:50 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>
>>
>> Op 23 dec. 2011, om 09:37 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> On Friday 23 December 2011 09:28:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>> Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:
>>>>> I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a lot
>>>>> to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
>>>>> meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard
>>>>> BPS?
>>>> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/
>>>>
>>>> It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it
>>>> precisely.
>>>
>>> Just out of interest, why does meta-texasinstruments depend on meta-angstrom?
>>
>> It needs extra things in overrides and reuses tasks from there.
>
> Sorry for the follow-up, but if I clone the meta-texasinstruments bsp repository and checkout the pandaboard-rework branch,
> how does that relate to the Yocto branch/bsp yocto/standard/pandaboard on the Yocto site?

I'll jump into the middle of the thread, and answer a couple of specific
questions and leave the larger what depends on what, and where
things evolve and why .. for another day.

The yocto/standard/pandaboard in the 3.0 kernel tree is the refresh/update
of a reference BSP for the 3.0 (and newer) kernel(s).

But what you are seeing ,in the linux-yocto kernel tree, is a work in
progress at the moment, since there is an associated layer that is a
combo layer, and uses the layer tooling to build on top work that has
already been done by TI and other distro layers.

Since, as already been covered in this thread, there (often) multiple
places support for any  given board can be found. What you use, all
depends on what you are looking for.

The linux-yocto variant is built/tested with a yocto + oe-core base
and receives updates of features/fixes that other BSPs in the tree
gets. (note: I'm not claiming this is unique, just that it is done
using the yocto kernel tooling ). A common set of features and docs
would accompany any related BSPs. In this case, the BSP was contributed
to the project on the 3.0 kernel, so I merged it into the tree to
have that integrated support with as few layers as possible.

If you want the angstrom/TI pandaboard, doing what Koen suggests is
the ticket. Look at those layers, follow their READMEs and you'll be
good to go.

Cheers,

Bruce



>
> Being a Yocto newbie, it's hard enough to understand all the branches on the yocto site. Relating the meta-angstrom is confusing.
>
> The light bulb has now gone on yet :-)
>
> Jim A
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> yocto mailing list
>> yocto@yoctoproject.org
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: meta-ti?????

[Philip Balister]

On 12/23/2011 12:10 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On 11-12-23 08:10 AM, James Abernathy wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 23, 2011, at 3:50 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Op 23 dec. 2011, om 09:37 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
>>>
>>>> On Friday 23 December 2011 09:28:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>>> Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:
>>>>>> I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a
>>>>>> lot
>>>>>> to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
>>>>>> meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard
>>>>>> BPS?
>>>>> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it
>>>>> precisely.
>>>>
>>>> Just out of interest, why does meta-texasinstruments depend on
>>>> meta-angstrom?
>>>
>>> It needs extra things in overrides and reuses tasks from there.
>>
>> Sorry for the follow-up, but if I clone the meta-texasinstruments bsp
>> repository and checkout the pandaboard-rework branch,
>> how does that relate to the Yocto branch/bsp yocto/standard/pandaboard
>> on the Yocto site?
> 
> I'll jump into the middle of the thread, and answer a couple of specific
> questions and leave the larger what depends on what, and where
> things evolve and why .. for another day.
> 
> The yocto/standard/pandaboard in the 3.0 kernel tree is the refresh/update
> of a reference BSP for the 3.0 (and newer) kernel(s).

Who is the intended audience of this BSP? The Angstrom/meta-to layer is
obviously intended for people using TI hardware and all the associated
peripherals. Without defining your audience better, this jsut adds to
the confusion end users are experiencing with all the words and layers
being used in emails. This is becoming a real problem as new users enter
the project.

Philip

> 
> But what you are seeing ,in the linux-yocto kernel tree, is a work in
> progress at the moment, since there is an associated layer that is a
> combo layer, and uses the layer tooling to build on top work that has
> already been done by TI and other distro layers.
> 
> Since, as already been covered in this thread, there (often) multiple
> places support for any  given board can be found. What you use, all
> depends on what you are looking for.
> 
> The linux-yocto variant is built/tested with a yocto + oe-core base
> and receives updates of features/fixes that other BSPs in the tree
> gets. (note: I'm not claiming this is unique, just that it is done
> using the yocto kernel tooling ). A common set of features and docs
> would accompany any related BSPs. In this case, the BSP was contributed
> to the project on the 3.0 kernel, so I merged it into the tree to
> have that integrated support with as few layers as possible.
> 
> If you want the angstrom/TI pandaboard, doing what Koen suggests is
> the ticket. Look at those layers, follow their READMEs and you'll be
> good to go.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Bruce
> 
> 
> 
>>
>> Being a Yocto newbie, it's hard enough to understand all the branches
>> on the yocto site. Relating the meta-angstrom is confusing.
>>
>> The light bulb has now gone on yet :-)
>>
>> Jim A
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> yocto mailing list
>>> yocto@yoctoproject.org
>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> yocto mailing list
>> yocto@yoctoproject.org
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
> 
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
> 

Re: meta-ti?????

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 11-12-23 12:38 PM, Philip Balister wrote:
> On 12/23/2011 12:10 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>> On 11-12-23 08:10 AM, James Abernathy wrote:
>>>
>>> On Dec 23, 2011, at 3:50 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Op 23 dec. 2011, om 09:37 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
>>>>
>>>>> On Friday 23 December 2011 09:28:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>>>> Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:
>>>>>>> I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a
>>>>>>> lot
>>>>>>> to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
>>>>>>> meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard
>>>>>>> BPS?
>>>>>> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it
>>>>>> precisely.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just out of interest, why does meta-texasinstruments depend on
>>>>> meta-angstrom?
>>>>
>>>> It needs extra things in overrides and reuses tasks from there.
>>>
>>> Sorry for the follow-up, but if I clone the meta-texasinstruments bsp
>>> repository and checkout the pandaboard-rework branch,
>>> how does that relate to the Yocto branch/bsp yocto/standard/pandaboard
>>> on the Yocto site?
>>
>> I'll jump into the middle of the thread, and answer a couple of specific
>> questions and leave the larger what depends on what, and where
>> things evolve and why .. for another day.
>>
>> The yocto/standard/pandaboard in the 3.0 kernel tree is the refresh/update
>> of a reference BSP for the 3.0 (and newer) kernel(s).
>
> Who is the intended audience of this BSP? The Angstrom/meta-to layer is
> obviously intended for people using TI hardware and all the associated
> peripherals. Without defining your audience better, this jsut adds to
> the confusion end users are experiencing with all the words and layers
> being used in emails. This is becoming a real problem as new users enter
> the project.

Quite simply, the audience that needs a particular kernel version
and feature set, with the tooling to transition to a supported (i.e
not the yocto one) BSP.

Cheers,

Bruce

>
> Philip
>
>>
>> But what you are seeing ,in the linux-yocto kernel tree, is a work in
>> progress at the moment, since there is an associated layer that is a
>> combo layer, and uses the layer tooling to build on top work that has
>> already been done by TI and other distro layers.
>>
>> Since, as already been covered in this thread, there (often) multiple
>> places support for any  given board can be found. What you use, all
>> depends on what you are looking for.
>>
>> The linux-yocto variant is built/tested with a yocto + oe-core base
>> and receives updates of features/fixes that other BSPs in the tree
>> gets. (note: I'm not claiming this is unique, just that it is done
>> using the yocto kernel tooling ). A common set of features and docs
>> would accompany any related BSPs. In this case, the BSP was contributed
>> to the project on the 3.0 kernel, so I merged it into the tree to
>> have that integrated support with as few layers as possible.
>>
>> If you want the angstrom/TI pandaboard, doing what Koen suggests is
>> the ticket. Look at those layers, follow their READMEs and you'll be
>> good to go.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Being a Yocto newbie, it's hard enough to understand all the branches
>>> on the yocto site. Relating the meta-angstrom is confusing.
>>>
>>> The light bulb has now gone on yet :-)
>>>
>>> Jim A
>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> yocto mailing list
>>>> yocto@yoctoproject.org
>>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> yocto mailing list
>>> yocto@yoctoproject.org
>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> yocto mailing list
>> yocto@yoctoproject.org
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>>

Re: meta-ti?????

[Koen Kooi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2614 bytes --]


Op 23 dec. 2011, om 18:45 heeft Bruce Ashfield het volgende geschreven:

> On 11-12-23 12:38 PM, Philip Balister wrote:
>> On 12/23/2011 12:10 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>>> On 11-12-23 08:10 AM, James Abernathy wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Dec 23, 2011, at 3:50 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Op 23 dec. 2011, om 09:37 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Friday 23 December 2011 09:28:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>>>>> Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:
>>>>>>>> I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a
>>>>>>>> lot
>>>>>>>> to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
>>>>>>>> meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard
>>>>>>>> BPS?
>>>>>>> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it
>>>>>>> precisely.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Just out of interest, why does meta-texasinstruments depend on
>>>>>> meta-angstrom?
>>>>> 
>>>>> It needs extra things in overrides and reuses tasks from there.
>>>> 
>>>> Sorry for the follow-up, but if I clone the meta-texasinstruments bsp
>>>> repository and checkout the pandaboard-rework branch,
>>>> how does that relate to the Yocto branch/bsp yocto/standard/pandaboard
>>>> on the Yocto site?
>>> 
>>> I'll jump into the middle of the thread, and answer a couple of specific
>>> questions and leave the larger what depends on what, and where
>>> things evolve and why .. for another day.
>>> 
>>> The yocto/standard/pandaboard in the 3.0 kernel tree is the refresh/update
>>> of a reference BSP for the 3.0 (and newer) kernel(s).
>> 
>> Who is the intended audience of this BSP? The Angstrom/meta-to layer is
>> obviously intended for people using TI hardware and all the associated
>> peripherals. Without defining your audience better, this jsut adds to
>> the confusion end users are experiencing with all the words and layers
>> being used in emails. This is becoming a real problem as new users enter
>> the project.
> 
> Quite simply, the audience that needs a particular kernel version
> and feature set, with the tooling to transition to a supported (i.e
> not the yocto one) BSP.

You do realize that by doing this without informing anyone involved with the official pandaboard BSP the net effect is negative? And by 'negative' I mean "severe annoyance" among other things.

[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 169 bytes --]

Re: meta-ti?????

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 11-12-23 12:52 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>
> Op 23 dec. 2011, om 18:45 heeft Bruce Ashfield het volgende geschreven:
>
>> On 11-12-23 12:38 PM, Philip Balister wrote:
>>> On 12/23/2011 12:10 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>>>> On 11-12-23 08:10 AM, James Abernathy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 23, 2011, at 3:50 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Op 23 dec. 2011, om 09:37 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Friday 23 December 2011 09:28:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>>>>>> Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:
>>>>>>>>> I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a
>>>>>>>>> lot
>>>>>>>>> to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
>>>>>>>>> meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard
>>>>>>>>> BPS?
>>>>>>>> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it
>>>>>>>> precisely.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just out of interest, why does meta-texasinstruments depend on
>>>>>>> meta-angstrom?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It needs extra things in overrides and reuses tasks from there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry for the follow-up, but if I clone the meta-texasinstruments bsp
>>>>> repository and checkout the pandaboard-rework branch,
>>>>> how does that relate to the Yocto branch/bsp yocto/standard/pandaboard
>>>>> on the Yocto site?
>>>>
>>>> I'll jump into the middle of the thread, and answer a couple of specific
>>>> questions and leave the larger what depends on what, and where
>>>> things evolve and why .. for another day.
>>>>
>>>> The yocto/standard/pandaboard in the 3.0 kernel tree is the refresh/update
>>>> of a reference BSP for the 3.0 (and newer) kernel(s).
>>>
>>> Who is the intended audience of this BSP? The Angstrom/meta-to layer is
>>> obviously intended for people using TI hardware and all the associated
>>> peripherals. Without defining your audience better, this jsut adds to
>>> the confusion end users are experiencing with all the words and layers
>>> being used in emails. This is becoming a real problem as new users enter
>>> the project.
>>
>> Quite simply, the audience that needs a particular kernel version
>> and feature set, with the tooling to transition to a supported (i.e
>> not the yocto one) BSP.
>
> You do realize that by doing this without informing anyone involved with the official pandaboard BSP the net effect is negative? And by 'negative' I mean "severe annoyance" among other things.

.. and why would you assume that precisely that hadn't been done ?
It has been, via management channels at multiple companies and
organizations and is exactly why I said "a layer you can't get"
and "work in progress".

So please, no need to jump to anything resembling 'annoyance'.
There's plenty of that to go around, and it isn't constructive.

Bruce

>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: meta-ti?????

[Khem Raj]

On (23/12/11 12:59), Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On 11-12-23 12:52 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >
> >Op 23 dec. 2011, om 18:45 heeft Bruce Ashfield het volgende geschreven:
> >
> >>On 11-12-23 12:38 PM, Philip Balister wrote:
> >>>On 12/23/2011 12:10 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> >>>>On 11-12-23 08:10 AM, James Abernathy wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>On Dec 23, 2011, at 3:50 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Op 23 dec. 2011, om 09:37 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>On Friday 23 December 2011 09:28:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
> >>>>>>>>Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:
> >>>>>>>>>I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a
> >>>>>>>>>lot
> >>>>>>>>>to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
> >>>>>>>>>meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard
> >>>>>>>>>BPS?
> >>>>>>>>http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it
> >>>>>>>>precisely.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Just out of interest, why does meta-texasinstruments depend on
> >>>>>>>meta-angstrom?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>It needs extra things in overrides and reuses tasks from there.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Sorry for the follow-up, but if I clone the meta-texasinstruments bsp
> >>>>>repository and checkout the pandaboard-rework branch,
> >>>>>how does that relate to the Yocto branch/bsp yocto/standard/pandaboard
> >>>>>on the Yocto site?
> >>>>
> >>>>I'll jump into the middle of the thread, and answer a couple of specific
> >>>>questions and leave the larger what depends on what, and where
> >>>>things evolve and why .. for another day.
> >>>>
> >>>>The yocto/standard/pandaboard in the 3.0 kernel tree is the refresh/update
> >>>>of a reference BSP for the 3.0 (and newer) kernel(s).
> >>>
> >>>Who is the intended audience of this BSP? The Angstrom/meta-to layer is
> >>>obviously intended for people using TI hardware and all the associated
> >>>peripherals. Without defining your audience better, this jsut adds to
> >>>the confusion end users are experiencing with all the words and layers
> >>>being used in emails. This is becoming a real problem as new users enter
> >>>the project.
> >>
> >>Quite simply, the audience that needs a particular kernel version
> >>and feature set, with the tooling to transition to a supported (i.e
> >>not the yocto one) BSP.
> >
> >You do realize that by doing this without informing anyone involved with the official pandaboard BSP the net effect is negative? And by 'negative' I mean "severe annoyance" among other things.
> 
> .. and why would you assume that precisely that hadn't been done ?
> It has been, via management channels at multiple companies and
> organizations and is exactly why I said "a layer you can't get"
> and "work in progress".
> 
> So please, no need to jump to anything resembling 'annoyance'.
> There's plenty of that to go around, and it isn't constructive.

I think it would be nice if we had a wiki document which listed
various BSPs for a given platform that are available using the
given layers and some words differentiating them. That can help
end users in understanding and deciding which to use.

Re: meta-ti?????

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 12-01-04 12:15 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
> On (23/12/11 12:59), Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>> On 11-12-23 12:52 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>
>>> Op 23 dec. 2011, om 18:45 heeft Bruce Ashfield het volgende geschreven:
>>>
>>>> On 11-12-23 12:38 PM, Philip Balister wrote:
>>>>> On 12/23/2011 12:10 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>>>>>> On 11-12-23 08:10 AM, James Abernathy wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Dec 23, 2011, at 3:50 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Op 23 dec. 2011, om 09:37 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Friday 23 December 2011 09:28:31 Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 22 dec. 2011, om 16:06 heeft Jim Abernathy het volgende geschreven:
>>>>>>>>>>> I know the examples in the documentation of Yocto use meta-intel a
>>>>>>>>>>> lot
>>>>>>>>>>> to get the board specific BSPs like meta-crownbay or meta-n450.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is there a meta-ti or similar that gets you the meta-beagleboard and
>>>>>>>>>>> meta-pandaboard?  If not how do you clone and checkout the pandaboard
>>>>>>>>>>> BPS?
>>>>>>>>>> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstruments/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It has a README in there on how to set it up, read it and follow it
>>>>>>>>>> precisely.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just out of interest, why does meta-texasinstruments depend on
>>>>>>>>> meta-angstrom?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It needs extra things in overrides and reuses tasks from there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry for the follow-up, but if I clone the meta-texasinstruments bsp
>>>>>>> repository and checkout the pandaboard-rework branch,
>>>>>>> how does that relate to the Yocto branch/bsp yocto/standard/pandaboard
>>>>>>> on the Yocto site?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'll jump into the middle of the thread, and answer a couple of specific
>>>>>> questions and leave the larger what depends on what, and where
>>>>>> things evolve and why .. for another day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The yocto/standard/pandaboard in the 3.0 kernel tree is the refresh/update
>>>>>> of a reference BSP for the 3.0 (and newer) kernel(s).
>>>>>
>>>>> Who is the intended audience of this BSP? The Angstrom/meta-to layer is
>>>>> obviously intended for people using TI hardware and all the associated
>>>>> peripherals. Without defining your audience better, this jsut adds to
>>>>> the confusion end users are experiencing with all the words and layers
>>>>> being used in emails. This is becoming a real problem as new users enter
>>>>> the project.
>>>>
>>>> Quite simply, the audience that needs a particular kernel version
>>>> and feature set, with the tooling to transition to a supported (i.e
>>>> not the yocto one) BSP.
>>>
>>> You do realize that by doing this without informing anyone involved with the official pandaboard BSP the net effect is negative? And by 'negative' I mean "severe annoyance" among other things.
>>
>> .. and why would you assume that precisely that hadn't been done ?
>> It has been, via management channels at multiple companies and
>> organizations and is exactly why I said "a layer you can't get"
>> and "work in progress".
>>
>> So please, no need to jump to anything resembling 'annoyance'.
>> There's plenty of that to go around, and it isn't constructive.
>
> I think it would be nice if we had a wiki document which listed
> various BSPs for a given platform that are available using the
> given layers and some words differentiating them. That can help
> end users in understanding and deciding which to use.

AFAIK there are plans in this area for the 1.2 timeframe, perhaps
via the BSP portal that TomZ was creating. Something linked from the
wiki pages that list all the available layers would be the logical
place to locate something like this as well.

Richard may have more insight as to whether or not something is planned
like this.

Cheers,

Bruce