From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from www.dynamicdevices.co.uk (www.dynamicdevices.co.uk [89.200.136.37]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C92DE015F8 for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2013 07:51:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (cpc16-live22-2-0-cust180.know.cable.virginmedia.com [82.42.220.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by www.dynamicdevices.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73B3486096; Wed, 2 Oct 2013 14:51:03 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <524C32D7.6030705@dynamicdevices.co.uk> Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 15:51:03 +0100 From: Alex J Lennon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daiane Angolini References: <524C1BDA.8000507@dynamicdevices.co.uk> <524C218D.7020101@freescale.com> <524C2793.4020107@dynamicdevices.co.uk> <524C2FDA.4080908@freescale.com> In-Reply-To: <524C2FDA.4080908@freescale.com> Cc: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: Issues using meta-freescale i.MX6 vs LTIB ? X-BeenThere: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-fsl-* layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 14:51:07 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 02/10/2013 15:38, Daiane Angolini wrote: > On 10/02/2013 11:02 AM, Alex J Lennon wrote: >> >> On 02/10/2013 14:37, Daiane Angolini wrote: >>> On 10/02/2013 10:12 AM, Alex J Lennon wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I'm trying to qualify a decision to use Yocto / meta-freescale for an >>>> upcoming >>>> i.MX6 board variant (based on the Sabre reference) instead of using >>>> the >>>> officially supported release based on LTIB. >>>> >>>> My preference is strongly for the Yocto/OpenEmbedded build >>>> environment, >>>> for various reasons, but I understand that the Freescale i.MX6 BSP is >>>> not >>>> officially supported at this time. >>>> >>>> Knowing the experience and activity levels of the people working via >>>> these >>>> lists, I suspect that meta-freescale is by now significantly ahead of >>>> the current >>>> release of LTIB. >>>> >>>> That said I wonder if there are any known issues with using >>>> meta-freescale >>>> which might give me pause, and cause me to use LTIB at this time? >>> >>> You can see all current known issues here >>> https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=meta-fsl-arm&list_id=105732 >>> >>> >>> >>> As you may know, the last LTIB release from Freescale was 3.0.35_4.1.0. >>> >> >> Thanks Daiane, >> >> I guess what I'm really asking is, what are the drawbacks and >> limitations (just just bugs per-se) >> with using the current under-development i.MX6 OpenEmbedded BSP vs the >> released LTIB BSP >> >> Maybe to put it another way, functionally is there a roadmap for where >> the i.MX6 BSP is at >> and what isn't yet working or supported. Presumably there are things >> that are not working >> or supported or FSL would be offically supporting at this time...? > > I don't like to leave non replied questions along my way. Although, > this is the most difficult kind of question to answer. > > I, personally, cannot promise you what Freescale will or will not > officially support. I can say what I'm supposed to support. And, > officially, I'm only supposed to support imx-community. > > Although, I've been working a lot with meta-fsl-arm, and everything I > can do internally to improve meta-fsl-arm technical support I've been > doing. > > I've been using only yocto since 2 years ago. Last time I installed a > new Ubuntu on my machine I even tried to install LTIB. > > I don't have any LTIB installed on my machine any more \o/ > > And, every time I need to reproduce a customer's issue, I use yocto to > generate whatever I need. (but for Android) > > > The things that are not working and I would love to see working is; > > * all user-space package independent on kernel headers > * MM support for linux mainline > * Wayland accelerated for imx6 (all other board by SW only) > * I know there are details on GPU support that is not perfect enough, > but you must judge if it's needed or not for you. > > > For official support and roadmap, please contact you local Freescale > representative. > > For kernel feature list (linux-imx), please, consult linux reference > manual from the proper release version. > > Again, I cannot say "official" things to you. I'm not the official > Freescale voice. > >> Understood. But thanks for taking the time to respond. It's much appreciated, and I those are very helpful comments. There's nothing there that would be a blocker for me for this board - it's destined to be a headless embedded gateway- although from what I heard on Wayland from the Intel guys that's something I'd like to try if I ever manage to find the time :) Cheers, Alex