bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

[Chuck Kamas]

Hi all,

I have recently upgraded from using the Angstrom distribution to the
minimal and now micro distribution.  One thing that now fails in both of
these distros is:

bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

They both now complain that it can not open a display.  I have traced
this to the fact that DISPLAY is not set to 0.0 in either the minimal or
the micro distributions.  The only place I can find display set in the
recopies is in xqtlauncher and startxqt.  So how do I set up an export
DISPLAY=0.0 such that menuconfig gets it?

Also I noticed that the patch files are being applied before menuconfig
in Angstrom but not in minimal and micro.  How do I fix this?

Thanks!
Chuck

Re: bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

[Koen Kooi]

On 01-06-09 22:41, Chuck Kamas wrote:

> Also I noticed that the patch files are being applied before menuconfig
> in Angstrom but not in minimal and micro.  How do I fix this?

By going back to angstrom

Re: bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

[Chuck Kamas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 765 bytes --]

:-)
 
But there is too much bloat in angstrom.  I need a lean mean fighting machine.
 
Chuck
 

________________________________

From: openembedded-devel-bounces@lists.openembedded.org on behalf of Koen Kooi
Sent: Mon 6/1/2009 2:13 PM
To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [oe] bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig



On 01-06-09 22:41, Chuck Kamas wrote:

> Also I noticed that the patch files are being applied before menuconfig
> in Angstrom but not in minimal and micro.  How do I fix this?

By going back to angstrom


_______________________________________________
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel



[-- Attachment #2: winmail.dat --]
[-- Type: application/ms-tnef, Size: 4026 bytes --]

Re: bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

[Koen Kooi]

On 02-06-09 07:18, Chuck Kamas wrote:
> :-)
>
> But there is too much bloat in angstrom.  I need a lean mean fighting machine.

That is just bullshit. You said you switched from angstrom to minimal to 
'upgrade', well minimal is just a copy of angstrom with some sed 
s:angstrom:minimal: applied. And if you look real close at micro you'll 
see that the only real differences with angstrom are:

1) different uclibc config
2) more applets in busybox
3) doesn't touch task-base.

And further more, their 'micro-image' is using features of image.bbclass 
that were done by angstrom developers for the angstrom distribution, but 
in such a way that they were generally applicable.

So, knowing all this, please elaborate on the 'bloat' you are talking 
about.

regards,

Koen

Re: bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

[Philip Balister]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1316 bytes --]

Chuck Kamas wrote:
> :-)
>  
> But there is too much bloat in angstrom.  I need a lean mean fighting machine.

Build micro-image against Angstrom.

Angstrom is not bloated, only a number of images people build. And they 
are building these images to support user requests.

Philip

>  
> Chuck
>  
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: openembedded-devel-bounces@lists.openembedded.org on behalf of Koen Kooi
> Sent: Mon 6/1/2009 2:13 PM
> To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org
> Subject: Re: [oe] bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig
> 
> 
> 
> On 01-06-09 22:41, Chuck Kamas wrote:
> 
>> Also I noticed that the patch files are being applied before menuconfig
>> in Angstrom but not in minimal and micro.  How do I fix this?
> 
> By going back to angstrom
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3303 bytes --]

Re: bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

[Phil Blundell]

On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 13:41 -0700, Chuck Kamas wrote:
> They both now complain that it can not open a display.  I have traced
> this to the fact that DISPLAY is not set to 0.0 in either the minimal or
> the micro distributions.  The only place I can find display set in the
> recopies is in xqtlauncher and startxqt.  So how do I set up an export
> DISPLAY=0.0 such that menuconfig gets it?

I'd have thought you would be able to put it in the environment, but
failing that local.conf should work.

> Also I noticed that the patch files are being applied before menuconfig
> in Angstrom but not in minimal and micro.  How do I fix this?

That's a bit odd.  Which particular kernel are you trying to build?

p.

Re: bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

[Chuck Kamas]

> > export DISPLAY=0.0 such that menuconfig gets it?
> 
> I'd have thought you would be able to put it in the 
> environment, but failing that local.conf should work.

I'll give this a try.

> 
> > Also I noticed that the patch files are being applied before 
> > menuconfig in Angstrom but not in minimal and micro.  How 
> do I fix this?
> 
> That's a bit odd.  Which particular kernel are you trying to build?
> 

The kernel is 2.6.28 and the patches are the AT91 set.   What is
interesting is that I change nothing but the distro= line and the
menuconfig works with the patches applied.  I do know that there is a
lot hidden behind the distro= line,  that is why I am asking the experts
for their insight into how it all works and where to look for what is
going wrong.

Regarding Angstrom:  I have no animosity against it. I am simply
following the rule: "start with the bare metal and build up".  This is
allowing me to learn how OE works and be a contributing member of the
community.  I could have gone the other way, but I find a great number
of options confusing.  It is just a preference thing.  I choose "small"
in both the sense of options and image size.

Chuck

Re: bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

[Koen Kooi]

On 02-06-09 16:43, Chuck Kamas wrote:
>   I choose "small"
> in both the sense of options and image size.

You continue to ignore people saying that image size is coupled to 
images, not distros. Why do you do that?

Re: bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

[Phil Blundell]

On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 07:43 -0700, Chuck Kamas wrote:
> The kernel is 2.6.28 and the patches are the AT91 set.   What is
> interesting is that I change nothing but the distro= line and the
> menuconfig works with the patches applied.  I do know that there is a
> lot hidden behind the distro= line,  that is why I am asking the experts
> for their insight into how it all works and where to look for what is
> going wrong.

I just did "bitbake -c menuconfig
-b ../org.openembedded.dev/recipes/linux/linux_2.6.28.bb" using
DISTRO=minimal, MACHINE=at91sam9263ek and it seemed to apply the patches
correctly:

NOTE: Running task 4 of 5 (ID:
3, /home/pb/oe/org.openembedded.dev/recipes/linux/linux_2.6.28.bb,
do_patch)
NOTE: Applying patch
'linux-2.6.28-at91.patch' (tmp/work/at91sam9263ek-oe-linux-gnueabi/linux-2.6.28-r9/linux-2.6.28-at91.patch)
NOTE: Applying patch
'linux-2.6.28-exp.patch' (tmp/work/at91sam9263ek-oe-linux-gnueabi/linux-2.6.28-r9/linux-2.6.28-exp.patch)
NOTE: Running task 5 of 5 (ID:
4, /home/pb/oe/org.openembedded.dev/recipes/linux/linux_2.6.28.bb,
do_menuconfig)

So, I'm a bit baffled as to why it isn't working for you.  I also tried
the same thing with DISTRO=micro and, again, it worked fine for me.

> Regarding Angstrom:  I have no animosity against it. I am simply
> following the rule: "start with the bare metal and build up".

Right, that's a perfectly respectable point of view.  Micro, at least,
is less complicated than Angstrom and does have the potential to produce
smaller images.  Actually, that reminds me, I have some patches to
eliminate further bloat in micro that I should submit :-)

p.

Re: bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

[Chuck Kamas]

> I just did "bitbake -c menuconfig
> -b ../org.openembedded.dev/recipes/linux/linux_2.6.28.bb" 
> using DISTRO=minimal, MACHINE=at91sam9263ek and it seemed to 
> apply the patches
> correctly:
> 

Interesting.  I must have something configured incorrectly (no
kidding!).  
Are you working on the STABLE/2009 branch? 
Did you remove the tmp directory between builds?

Thanks for the help.
Chuck

Re: bitbake virtual/kernel -c menuconfig

[Phil Blundell]

On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 10:05 -0700, Chuck Kamas wrote:
> > I just did "bitbake -c menuconfig
> > -b ../org.openembedded.dev/recipes/linux/linux_2.6.28.bb" 
> > using DISTRO=minimal, MACHINE=at91sam9263ek and it seemed to 
> > apply the patches
> > correctly:
> > 
> 
> Interesting.  I must have something configured incorrectly (no
> kidding!).  
> Are you working on the STABLE/2009 branch? 
> Did you remove the tmp directory between builds?

Ah, no, I'm on the org.openembedded.dev branch.  That might be the
difference.

I didn't remove the whole of tmp/ between builds but I did clean the
linux-2.6.28 package.

p.