From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Naumann Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 15:35:58 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [RFC] ti-gfx: add new package In-Reply-To: References: <1370636307-23089-1-git-send-email-spenser@gillilanding.com> Message-ID: <51BF10BE.2010502@andin.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hi Spenser, Am 13.06.2013 16:58, schrieb Spenser Gilliland: > Hi Naumann, > > Thanks for working on this patch. Hopefully, this cleaned up and > included in the next release. > >> I'm happily jumping on integrating the egl stuff in buildroot (and qt), thanks for you start Spenser. >> As for Charles concerns, I too see the kernel build being triggered by ti-gfx, but that's natural since the modules depend on it. I have no problems with that. However, since I'm using a 3.1 kernel, the newclkapi patch broke the ti-gfx build for me. I just removed it, but maybe this can be solved better. > > To solve this problem, an ifdef on the kernel version should be done. > I'll try to figure out which version incorporated the clock changes > and add this to the patch. It came in in 3.2. > >> To go further with the qt support, I have added staging headers and libs, see patch below. I can now build qt5 with the gui module (which needs the eglfs support). However, when preparing an out of tree qt-project with buildroots qmake, the subsequent make step says it's got nothing to do. Looking into it, the SOURCES from the .pro file did not get picked up, but I have no idea why. Maybe this is another post though. > > I'll leave this one for someone more experience in QT and I agree that > this issue does seem external to the inclusion of the ti-gfx package. > > The patch below looks good to me. I'm hoping to get some run time > testing on a couple of boards (Beagleboard xM/Beaglebone Black) done > by next week. Then, this patch should be ready for inclusion or at > least moving to a proper patch review. I'm a little on hold until I get further with the qmake issue, but I'm thinking about further integrating the target install step. How can we work together on this? I mean, in case you (or I) want to incorporate Arnouts comments and then go further? cheers, Andreas > > Thanks, > > Spenser > > -- > Spenser Gilliland > Computer Engineer > Doctoral Candidate > _______________________________________________ > buildroot mailing list > buildroot at busybox.net > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot >