What is GMAE?

What is GMAE?

[Tim Bird]

I was reading in the adt manual about using the cross-toochain tarball,
and I came across this sentence:

"If you need GMAE, you should use the bitbake meta-toolchain-gmae command. The resulting installation script when run will support such development. However, if you are not concerned with GMAE, you
can generate the toolchain installer using bitbake meta-toolchain."

After googling a bit, I figured out that GMAE stands for Gnome Mobile and Embedded.

It might be good to put this acronym somewhere in the manual.
(I'm still not sure if I need GMAE or not...)

 -- Tim

=============================
Tim Bird
Architecture Group Chair, CE Workgroup of the Linux Foundation
Senior Staff Engineer, Sony Network Entertainment
=============================

Re: What is GMAE?

[Burton, Ross]

On 14 December 2012 19:43, Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com> wrote:
> "If you need GMAE, you should use the bitbake meta-toolchain-gmae command. The resulting installation script when run will support such development. However, if you are not concerned with GMAE, you
> can generate the toolchain installer using bitbake meta-toolchain."
>
> After googling a bit, I figured out that GMAE stands for Gnome Mobile and Embedded.
>
> It might be good to put this acronym somewhere in the manual.
> (I'm still not sure if I need GMAE or not...)

Basically, GMAE means GTK+ 2 and bits of the GNOME stack.

A stealth plan of mine is to remove every trace of GMAE from Yocto.
It was an initiative Poky was involved with back in the OpenedHand
days that didn't really take off, and we're still carrying pieces of
it.

Ross

Re: What is GMAE?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Fri, 14 Dec 2012, Burton, Ross wrote:

> On 14 December 2012 19:43, Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com> wrote:
> > "If you need GMAE, you should use the bitbake meta-toolchain-gmae command. The resulting installation script when run will support such development. However, if you are not concerned with GMAE, you
> > can generate the toolchain installer using bitbake meta-toolchain."
> >
> > After googling a bit, I figured out that GMAE stands for Gnome Mobile and Embedded.
> >
> > It might be good to put this acronym somewhere in the manual.
> > (I'm still not sure if I need GMAE or not...)
>
> Basically, GMAE means GTK+ 2 and bits of the GNOME stack.
>
> A stealth plan of mine is to remove every trace of GMAE from Yocto.

  a good place to start would be to remove the "gmae" component from
the name of the toolchains themselves:

http://downloads.yoctoproject.org/releases/yocto/yocto-1.2/toolchain/x86-64/

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: What is GMAE?

[Mark Hatle]

On 12/14/12 1:46 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> On 14 December 2012 19:43, Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com> wrote:
>> "If you need GMAE, you should use the bitbake meta-toolchain-gmae command. The resulting installation script when run will support such development. However, if you are not concerned with GMAE, you
>> can generate the toolchain installer using bitbake meta-toolchain."
>>
>> After googling a bit, I figured out that GMAE stands for Gnome Mobile and Embedded.
>>
>> It might be good to put this acronym somewhere in the manual.
>> (I'm still not sure if I need GMAE or not...)
>
> Basically, GMAE means GTK+ 2 and bits of the GNOME stack.
>
> A stealth plan of mine is to remove every trace of GMAE from Yocto.
> It was an initiative Poky was involved with back in the OpenedHand
> days that didn't really take off, and we're still carrying pieces of
> it.

I get this question a lot.  With the ability (new in 1.3) to build an SDK based 
on the contents of any arbitrary image.. the meta-toolchain-gmae is simply not 
necessary.

bitbake -c populate_sdk <image recipe>

--Mark

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

Re: What is GMAE?

[Zhang, Jessica]

Actually I talked with Richard regarding retiring the toolchain targets (meta-toolchain and meta-toolchain-gmae) as Mark mentioned that now we can build a toolchain matching the image.  Also, we're continue improving adt-installer which also allows you to setup sysroot using the target image as well.  Richard's concern is there maybe some legacy user that preferred the toolchain target. With the latest changes in toolchain generation which really maps to target images, probably we should unplug to legacy ones to make the toolchain generation more streamline.  Thoughts or concerns?

Thanks,
Jessica

-----Original Message-----
From: yocto-bounces@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto-bounces@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Mark Hatle
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2012 12:46 PM
To: yocto@yoctoproject.org
Subject: Re: [yocto] What is GMAE?

On 12/14/12 1:46 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> On 14 December 2012 19:43, Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com> wrote:
>> "If you need GMAE, you should use the bitbake meta-toolchain-gmae
>> command. The resulting installation script when run will support such development. However, if you are not concerned with GMAE, you can generate the toolchain installer using bitbake meta-toolchain."
>>
>> After googling a bit, I figured out that GMAE stands for Gnome Mobile and Embedded.
>>
>> It might be good to put this acronym somewhere in the manual.
>> (I'm still not sure if I need GMAE or not...)
>
> Basically, GMAE means GTK+ 2 and bits of the GNOME stack.
>
> A stealth plan of mine is to remove every trace of GMAE from Yocto.
> It was an initiative Poky was involved with back in the OpenedHand
> days that didn't really take off, and we're still carrying pieces of
> it.

I get this question a lot.  With the ability (new in 1.3) to build an SDK based on the contents of any arbitrary image.. the meta-toolchain-gmae is simply not necessary.

bitbake -c populate_sdk <image recipe>

--Mark

> Ross
> _______________________________________________
> 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: What is GMAE?

[Brian Hutchinson]

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Zhang, Jessica <jessica.zhang@intel.com> wrote:
> Actually I talked with Richard regarding retiring the toolchain targets (meta-toolchain and meta-toolchain-gmae) as Mark mentioned that now we can build a toolchain matching the >image.  Also, we're continue improving adt-installer which also allows you to setup sysroot using the target image as well.  Richard's concern is there maybe some legacy user that >preferred the toolchain target. With the latest changes in toolchain generation which really maps to target images, probably we should unplug to legacy ones to make the toolchain generation more streamline.  Thoughts or concerns?

I'm one of the users that is stuck using Edison 6.0.  I'm desperate
for the ability to generate a toolchain and sysroot that matches our
target.  Right now I have to build meta-toolchain and then manually
look in the tmp for sysroot-destdir related stuff from our build and
copy it to the sysroot in /opt/poky and hand that out to developers.
When our sister group overseas makes a change that effects the sysroot
it breaks our build and I have to figure out what happened and
manually adjust our sysroot to fix the problem.  I sure would like to
be able to just do an update and then bitbake the toolchain to pick up
the changes.  I figure we are stuck with Edison for a while ... can I
back port these toolchain features you all are talking about to
Edison?

Regards,

Brian

Re: What is GMAE?

[Tim Bird]

On 12/14/2012 12:45 PM, Mark Hatle wrote:
> On 12/14/12 1:46 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>> On 14 December 2012 19:43, Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com> wrote:
>>> "If you need GMAE, you should use the bitbake meta-toolchain-gmae command. The resulting installation script when run will support such development. However, if you are not concerned with GMAE, you
>>> can generate the toolchain installer using bitbake meta-toolchain."
>>>
>>> After googling a bit, I figured out that GMAE stands for Gnome Mobile and Embedded.
>>>
>>> It might be good to put this acronym somewhere in the manual.
>>> (I'm still not sure if I need GMAE or not...)
>>
>> Basically, GMAE means GTK+ 2 and bits of the GNOME stack.
>>
>> A stealth plan of mine is to remove every trace of GMAE from Yocto.
>> It was an initiative Poky was involved with back in the OpenedHand
>> days that didn't really take off, and we're still carrying pieces of
>> it.
> 
> I get this question a lot.  With the ability (new in 1.3) to build an SDK based 
> on the contents of any arbitrary image.. the meta-toolchain-gmae is simply not 
> necessary.
> 
> bitbake -c populate_sdk <image recipe>

Aha.  Thanks very much.

Is this the preferred way to get a toolchain out of yocto?
That's exactly what I'm working on at the moment (well, after
fixing up some toolchain build issues I've encountered after
messing around a bit with the toolchain recipes...;-)

 -- Tim


=============================
Tim Bird
Architecture Group Chair, CE Workgroup of the Linux Foundation
Senior Staff Engineer, Sony Network Entertainment
=============================

Re: What is GMAE?

[Zhang, Jessica]

So instead of back port, have you looked into adt-installer to address your need.  It's sysroot is based on target images.  The only downside is it's based on opkg and ipk if that's not your default package format.

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Hutchinson [mailto:b.hutchman@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2012 1:58 PM
To: Zhang, Jessica
Cc: Mark Hatle; yocto@yoctoproject.org
Subject: Re: [yocto] What is GMAE?

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Zhang, Jessica <jessica.zhang@intel.com> wrote:
> Actually I talked with Richard regarding retiring the toolchain targets (meta-toolchain and meta-toolchain-gmae) as Mark mentioned that now we can build a toolchain matching the >image.  Also, we're continue improving adt-installer which also allows you to setup sysroot using the target image as well.  Richard's concern is there maybe some legacy user that >preferred the toolchain target. With the latest changes in toolchain generation which really maps to target images, probably we should unplug to legacy ones to make the toolchain generation more streamline.  Thoughts or concerns?

I'm one of the users that is stuck using Edison 6.0.  I'm desperate for the ability to generate a toolchain and sysroot that matches our target.  Right now I have to build meta-toolchain and then manually look in the tmp for sysroot-destdir related stuff from our build and copy it to the sysroot in /opt/poky and hand that out to developers.
When our sister group overseas makes a change that effects the sysroot it breaks our build and I have to figure out what happened and manually adjust our sysroot to fix the problem.  I sure would like to be able to just do an update and then bitbake the toolchain to pick up the changes.  I figure we are stuck with Edison for a while ... can I back port these toolchain features you all are talking about to Edison?

Regards,

Brian

Re: What is GMAE?

[Mark Hatle]

On 12/14/12 4:12 PM, Tim Bird wrote:
> On 12/14/2012 12:45 PM, Mark Hatle wrote:
>> On 12/14/12 1:46 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>>> On 14 December 2012 19:43, Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com> wrote:
>>>> "If you need GMAE, you should use the bitbake meta-toolchain-gmae command. The resulting installation script when run will support such development. However, if you are not concerned with GMAE, you
>>>> can generate the toolchain installer using bitbake meta-toolchain."
>>>>
>>>> After googling a bit, I figured out that GMAE stands for Gnome Mobile and Embedded.
>>>>
>>>> It might be good to put this acronym somewhere in the manual.
>>>> (I'm still not sure if I need GMAE or not...)
>>>
>>> Basically, GMAE means GTK+ 2 and bits of the GNOME stack.
>>>
>>> A stealth plan of mine is to remove every trace of GMAE from Yocto.
>>> It was an initiative Poky was involved with back in the OpenedHand
>>> days that didn't really take off, and we're still carrying pieces of
>>> it.
>>
>> I get this question a lot.  With the ability (new in 1.3) to build an SDK based
>> on the contents of any arbitrary image.. the meta-toolchain-gmae is simply not
>> necessary.
>>
>> bitbake -c populate_sdk <image recipe>
>
> Aha.  Thanks very much.
>
> Is this the preferred way to get a toolchain out of yocto?
> That's exactly what I'm working on at the moment (well, after
> fixing up some toolchain build issues I've encountered after
> messing around a bit with the toolchain recipes...;-)

I don't know if it's the preferred "Yocto Project" way.. but it's the only way I 
do it.

The code was implemented in the middle of the 1.3 process and does work in 1.3. 
  (However multilib support may not be there.  There are a series of patches 
pending for master that do enable the multilib support as part of the rpm/smart 
work.)

--Mark

>   -- Tim
>
>
> =============================
> Tim Bird
> Architecture Group Chair, CE Workgroup of the Linux Foundation
> Senior Staff Engineer, Sony Network Entertainment
> =============================
>
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>

Re: What is GMAE?

[Mark Hatle]

On 12/14/12 3:57 PM, Brian Hutchinson wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Zhang, Jessica <jessica.zhang@intel.com> wrote:
>> Actually I talked with Richard regarding retiring the toolchain targets (meta-toolchain and meta-toolchain-gmae) as Mark mentioned that now we can build a toolchain matching the >image.  Also, we're continue improving adt-installer which also allows you to setup sysroot using the target image as well.  Richard's concern is there maybe some legacy user that >preferred the toolchain target. With the latest changes in toolchain generation which really maps to target images, probably we should unplug to legacy ones to make the toolchain generation more streamline.  Thoughts or concerns?
>
> I'm one of the users that is stuck using Edison 6.0.  I'm desperate
> for the ability to generate a toolchain and sysroot that matches our
> target.  Right now I have to build meta-toolchain and then manually
> look in the tmp for sysroot-destdir related stuff from our build and
> copy it to the sysroot in /opt/poky and hand that out to developers.
> When our sister group overseas makes a change that effects the sysroot
> it breaks our build and I have to figure out what happened and
> manually adjust our sysroot to fix the problem.  I sure would like to
> be able to just do an update and then bitbake the toolchain to pick up
> the changes.  I figure we are stuck with Edison for a while ... can I
> back port these toolchain features you all are talking about to
> Edison?

There are changes to both bitbake and oe-core required.  You'll have to look 
back at the oe-core mailing list to find the right set to backport.

We have backported the items to our 1.2 (7.0 Denzil) based system, but I'm not 
aware of anyone who is using it in 1.1 (6.0 Edison).

--Mark

> Regards,
>
> Brian
>

Re: What is GMAE?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Fri, 14 Dec 2012, Tim Bird wrote:

> On 12/14/2012 12:45 PM, Mark Hatle wrote:
> > On 12/14/12 1:46 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> >> On 14 December 2012 19:43, Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com> wrote:
> >>> "If you need GMAE, you should use the bitbake meta-toolchain-gmae command. The resulting installation script when run will support such development. However, if you are not concerned with GMAE, you
> >>> can generate the toolchain installer using bitbake meta-toolchain."
> >>>
> >>> After googling a bit, I figured out that GMAE stands for Gnome Mobile and Embedded.
> >>>
> >>> It might be good to put this acronym somewhere in the manual.
> >>> (I'm still not sure if I need GMAE or not...)
> >>
> >> Basically, GMAE means GTK+ 2 and bits of the GNOME stack.
> >>
> >> A stealth plan of mine is to remove every trace of GMAE from Yocto.
> >> It was an initiative Poky was involved with back in the OpenedHand
> >> days that didn't really take off, and we're still carrying pieces of
> >> it.
> >
> > I get this question a lot.  With the ability (new in 1.3) to build an SDK based
> > on the contents of any arbitrary image.. the meta-toolchain-gmae is simply not
> > necessary.
> >
> > bitbake -c populate_sdk <image recipe>
>
> Aha.  Thanks very much.
>
> Is this the preferred way to get a toolchain out of yocto?
> That's exactly what I'm working on at the moment (well, after
> fixing up some toolchain build issues I've encountered after
> messing around a bit with the toolchain recipes...;-)

  some observations about the documentation (or lack thereof) of this
task since tim seemed susprised about it, and i remember vaguely
running across it once upon a time but forgetting about it.

  the entirety of mention of populate_sdk in all of the checked out
yocto-docs repo is:

$ grep -rw populate_sdk *
documentation/ref-manual/eclipse/html/poky-ref-manual/ref-variables-glos.html:                <code class="filename">bitbake -c populate_sdk imagename</code>).
documentation/ref-manual/ref-variables.xml:                <filename>bitbake -c populate_sdk imagename</filename>).
documentation/ref-manual/ref-classes.xml:        populate_sdk*.bbclass
$

and part of that is a large comment at the end of ref-classes.xml
listing all of the undocumented classes, so it would seem this task
merits a bit more coverage.

  also, the yocto wiki currently contains this page for the "SDK
Generator" but it hasn't been updated since 2010:

https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/SDK_Generator

  just making some observations, i'm currently working through the ADT
manual and building an SDK for my beagle as we speak.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

Re: What is GMAE?

[Jack Mitchell]

On 12/14/12 21:57, Brian Hutchinson wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Zhang, Jessica <jessica.zhang@intel.com> wrote:
>> Actually I talked with Richard regarding retiring the toolchain targets (meta-toolchain and meta-toolchain-gmae) as Mark mentioned that now we can build a toolchain matching the >image.  Also, we're continue improving adt-installer which also allows you to setup sysroot using the target image as well.  Richard's concern is there maybe some legacy user that >preferred the toolchain target. With the latest changes in toolchain generation which really maps to target images, probably we should unplug to legacy ones to make the toolchain generation more streamline.  Thoughts or concerns?
> I'm one of the users that is stuck using Edison 6.0.  I'm desperate
> for the ability to generate a toolchain and sysroot that matches our
> target.  Right now I have to build meta-toolchain and then manually
> look in the tmp for sysroot-destdir related stuff from our build and
> copy it to the sysroot in /opt/poky and hand that out to developers.
> When our sister group overseas makes a change that effects the sysroot
> it breaks our build and I have to figure out what happened and
> manually adjust our sysroot to fix the problem.  I sure would like to
> be able to just do an update and then bitbake the toolchain to pick up
> the changes.  I figure we are stuck with Edison for a while ... can I
> back port these toolchain features you all are talking about to
> Edison?

Hi Brian,

I may be missing a trick here, but for our internal toolchain I pretty 
much made a copy of meta-toolchain, made a copy of the 
toolchain-packagegroup, edited the package group to contain the same 
libs, apps etc as my image, pointed meta-toolchain copy to that 
package-group instead of the default and now when ever I make an update 
to the image it is just a case of running

bitbake core-image-product meta-toolchain-product

and that spits out both the image and customized toolchain. If I have 
missed something obvious then please excuse my ramblings :)

Cheers,
Jack.

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