From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [80.91.229.2] (helo=ciao.gmane.org) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JwylH-00020j-DY for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Fri, 16 May 2008 14:10:12 +0200 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Jwlsx-0006a8-PO for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Thu, 15 May 2008 22:25:15 +0000 Received: from s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl ([85.145.118.37]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 15 May 2008 22:25:15 +0000 Received: from k.kooi by s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 15 May 2008 22:25:15 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 00:25:07 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1210869726.7097.93.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080515201138.GB8281@smtp.west.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl User-Agent: Thunderbird 3.0a1pre (Macintosh/2008050803) In-Reply-To: Sender: news Subject: Re: [RFC] Stop on multiple providers but none explicitly specified X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.10b4 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 12:10:12 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Leon Woestenberg wrote: > Use cases: > > Selecting "MACHINE=microblaze_dev_board, bitbake helloworld-image.bb" > should work out of the box if we add the microblaze toolchain. > > Selecting "MACHINE=new_machine_with_new_arch DISTRO=old_distro bitbake > some-image.bb" should as least TRY to build the image for the machine > using the toolchain that is available in OpenEmbedded. I've tried to make OE do "the right thing" in the past, but at the time the ARM users were strongly divided into seperate camps, with conflicting use cases (eg. some people insisted on hard-float, others on soft-float). In the end it was both easier and cleaner (no double _distro_machine overrides in gcc_foo.bb) to specify the toolchain in the distro. Since a few weeks the toolchain portion in angstrom is a log cleaner since people can now use subarch overrrides (armv7a, ppc405) to base their decision on. From a practical POV I'd say "pick a distro that's maintained and supports uclibc" for you microblaze board, and you should have very little trouble getting it to work. From a theoretical POV I'd say "OE should do the right thing", but "the right thing" is sadly such a political minefield that makes having a distro based with lots of technical merits (subarch overrides, modularity, extendability, QA integration, etc) like Angstrom is a blessing. For years OE claimed "just change the MACHINE and everything just works", but it took angstrom nearly two years to make that a reality, so don't underestimate the work[1] involved making everything "just work" regards, Koen [1] Just look at the the sheer amount of nasty python code in angstrom to select OABI for certain machines in a sane, supportable way....