From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [143.182.124.21]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ACAAE01353 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2012 11:36:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from azsmga002.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.35]) by azsmga101.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Feb 2012 10:55:43 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,315,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="64143226" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.255.15.17]) ([10.255.15.17]) by AZSMGA002.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Feb 2012 10:54:42 -0800 Message-ID: <4F317372.6040501@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 10:54:42 -0800 From: Joshua Lock User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0) Gecko/20120131 Thunderbird/10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: yocto@yoctoproject.org References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: Building your own UI 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: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:36:08 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 07/02/12 07:57, James Abernathy wrote: > This may be a dumb question, but I'll ask anyway. > Suppose you have a project where you need a very custom user interface. > Not just a series of applications that appear on a desktop like you see > in sato, or Gnome, or KDE. Basically your application becomes the UI. > I can see 2 approaches to this: > > 1. Start with core-image-minimal and add the packages you need to > support GFX, X11, and your application plus dependencies. > 2. Take core-image-sato and change the applications to be your subtasks > , and the look-and-feel of the desktop. > > What are the considerations of both approaches? A key selling point of the Yocto approach is to provide a highly customised OS for your target application, rather than taking an existing solution and stripping it back. 2. is the antithesis of the Yocto approach if you don't want/need the Sato UI. The intention is that the core metadata should provide sufficient granularity through the defined images and tasks to get people started. I'd recommend something like 1. only taking core-image-core (horrible name I know) if you want an X based OS. We no doubt need more documentation in this area, and Hob is designed to help here. > Is one better, or easier than the other? Creating your own image is better in that you only build and ship what you need. Arguably building atop a custom image is easier, but you lose control. > How would you do this in Yocto? You might consider creating a custom image by starting with core-image-minimal and adding IMAGE_FEATURES and IMAGE_INSTALL entries to provide the core functionality you desire. $ less foo.bb # a noddy example image, base of a NAS OS # start with core-image-minimal require recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal.bb IMAGE_FEATURES += "package-management nfs-server ssh-server-dropbear" IMAGE_INSTALL += "my-custom-nas-app" > Where do you look for information you need to accomplish this? Mostly by following examples in the existing metadata at the moment, see the comment above about hob and documentation. Cheers, Joshua -- Joshua Lock Yocto Project "Johannes factotum" Intel Open Source Technology Centre