[Buildroot] Modular X.org

[Buildroot] Modular X.org

[John Voltz]

Hi,

I just wanted to inform anyone who is interested, the buildroot tree over at
http://code.google.com/p/buildroot can now build both modular and tiny X.org
servers AND drivers. The modular X will likely only build successfully for
desktop machine arches (i.e. x86, PPC?, etc.) because it requires a PCI bus.

If I can recruit someone with some spare time to generate a patch against
uClibc.org's tree and submit it upstream, I'm sure everyone will appreciate
it.

Regards,

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://busybox.net/lists/buildroot/attachments/20080623/596f85b8/attachment.htm 

[Buildroot] Modular X.org

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "John" == John Voltz <john.voltz@gmail.com> writes:

Hi John,

 John> Hi, I just wanted to inform anyone who is interested, the
 John> buildroot tree over at http://code.google.com/p/buildroot can
 John> now build both modular and tiny X.org servers AND drivers. The
 John> modular X will likely only build successfully for desktop
 John> machine arches (i.e. x86, PPC?, etc.) because it requires a PCI
 John> bus.

 John> If I can recruit someone with some spare time to generate a
 John> patch against uClibc.org's tree and submit it upstream, I'm
 John> sure everyone will appreciate it.

What is the purpose of the google repository again? Why don't you
develop in the uclibc repository? I take it that was why you got svn
commit access?

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

[Buildroot] Modular X.org

[John Voltz]

>
> What is the purpose of the google repository again? Why don't you
> develop in the uclibc repository? I take it that was why you got svn
> commit access?
>

To be perfectly honest, I don't have the time to argue about whitespaces and
other "nonsense", so I don't commit directly to uClibc.org anymore. I'm just
offering up the work I've done if anyone is interested, because modular xorg
has been a topic of some interest around the message boards.

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://busybox.net/lists/buildroot/attachments/20080623/cae982be/attachment.htm 

[Buildroot] Modular X.org

[Michael Trimarchi]

Hi,

--- Lun 23/6/08, John Voltz <john.voltz@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> To be perfectly honest, I don't have the time to argue
> about whitespaces and
> other "nonsense", so I don't commit directly
> to uClibc.org anymore. I'm just
> offering up the work I've done if anyone is interested,
> because modular xorg
> has been a topic of some interest around the message
> boards.
> 
I will try it for an sh4 board

Regards Michael



      ___________________________________ 
Scopri il Blog di Yahoo! Mail: trucchi, novit?, consigli... e la tua opinione!
http://www.ymailblogit.com/blog/

[Buildroot] Modular X.org

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "John" == John Voltz <john.voltz@gmail.com> writes:

Hi,

 John> To be perfectly honest, I don't have the time to argue about
 John> whitespaces and other "nonsense", so I don't commit directly to
 John> uClibc.org anymore. I'm just offering up the work I've done if
 John> anyone is interested, because modular xorg has been a topic of
 John> some interest around the message boards.

That's honest talk. I might not agree, but it's honest atleast. Does
this mean that you don't need your uclibc svn access anymore?

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

[Buildroot] Modular X.org

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 6:23 PM, Peter Korsgaard <jacmet@uclibc.org> wrote:
>  John> To be perfectly honest, I don't have the time to argue about
>  John> whitespaces and other "nonsense", so I don't commit directly to
>  John> uClibc.org anymore. I'm just offering up the work I've done if
>  John> anyone is interested, because modular xorg has been a topic of
>  John> some interest around the message boards.
>
> That's honest talk. I might not agree, but it's honest atleast. Does
> this mean that you don't need your uclibc svn access anymore?
>

Peter,

    That might not be all of the reasons. It's not just whitespaces
that got reverted, but things that are very important to John, Amaur
and me, such as AVR32 toolchain. That was pretty much the turning
point. I even dare to say that it was the wishes of every single AVR32
user to keep the buildroot toolchain support, but then again, my
arguments either felt in to deaf ears or were just not compelling
enough.

   Anyway, even though I do plan to commit and support upstream
buildroot, I will still keep committing to the google buildroot as
well, for that reason. The platform/processor that we all who have
access to the google fork use the most simply does not work upstream,
and we hear objections when we try to improve that.

   If disk space is more important, that's fine and I'm not going to
try to change that, we just move that part to Google who doesn't have
any issues with AVR32 patches.

Kind Regards,
   Thiago A. Correa

[Buildroot] Modular X.org

[John Voltz]

Modular X has been tested with the vesa, mouse, and keyboard drivers on x86
and it works well. One minor caveat, you have to start x with:

startx -- -ignoreABI


or it may complain about ABI mismatch between driver and server. I'm not
sure at the moment how the ABI versions are resolved and how to fix it.

Regards,

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://busybox.net/lists/buildroot/attachments/20080623/fdbda99f/attachment.htm 

[Buildroot] Modular X.org

[Ulf Samuelsson]

Thiago A. Corr?a wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 6:23 PM, Peter Korsgaard <jacmet@uclibc.org>
> wrote: 
>>  John> To be perfectly honest, I don't have the time to argue about
>>  John> whitespaces and other "nonsense", so I don't commit directly
>>  to John> uClibc.org anymore. I'm just offering up the work I've
>>  done if John> anyone is interested, because modular xorg has been a
>>  topic of John> some interest around the message boards.
>> 
>> That's honest talk. I might not agree, but it's honest atleast. Does
>> this mean that you don't need your uclibc svn access anymore?
>> 
> 
> Peter,
> 
>    That might not be all of the reasons. It's not just whitespaces
> that got reverted, but things that are very important to John, Amaur
> and me, such as AVR32 toolchain. That was pretty much the turning
> point. I even dare to say that it was the wishes of every single AVR32
> user to keep the buildroot toolchain support, but then again, my
> arguments either felt in to deaf ears or were just not compelling
> enough.

No, I am an AVR32 user, but I do not want the tree overloaded
with redundant patches.
You can build a toolchain using the external source.
The only difference is that you download the source 
*with* the patches from a different location, otherwise the build
process is identical.
If you need to fix something, you can apply patches.
The patches has to be located in target/device/Atmel/toolchain.

John requested that I put his prepatched toolchain source in the 
ATMEL_MIRROR and this was done within days after the
request, and it will not be hard to start supporting this
if someone is interested, and then the AVR32 toolchain
should have support for the latest version.
Again, if patches are needed for this, they can be added
to target/device/Atmel/toolchain tree.

Once I have time to test this, I will fix it, but unless
we have a rainy summer, I expect this to occur in August.

I know that there is complaints about not having write access
to the ATMEL_MIRROR. I do not need them to be at
this particular server, I prefer a server which will allow
access to more people.
Until we have a mirror with high bandwidth and high capacity
and accessible to all users with write access, I hope
we can live with this solution.  The cost will be a few days
of delay every time a completely new gcc version will
be available.

There was also complaints about speed, but I measured the download speed to several MBytes/s
so this must be temporary problems.

I have requested that the Atmel Trondheim provide official
prepatched source code of the toolset, but they think
that it is so close to have the toolchain support natively
that they think it is not worth the effort.
Hopefully they are right.

>   Anyway, even though I do plan to commit and support upstream
> buildroot, I will still keep committing to the google buildroot as
> well, for that reason. The platform/processor that we all who have
> access to the google fork use the most simply does not work upstream,
> and we hear objections when we try to improve that.
> 

No objections to improvements, but you can do it without adding
the large patches.

>   If disk space is more important, that's fine and I'm not going to
> try to change that, we just move that part to Google who doesn't have
> any issues with AVR32 patches.
> 
> Kind Regards,
>   Thiago A. Correa
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at uclibc.org
> http://busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson                ulf at atmel.com
Atmel Nordic AB
Mail:  Box 2033, 174 02 Sundbyberg, Sweden
Visit:  Kavalleriv?gen 24, 174 58 Sundbyberg, Sweden
Phone +46 (8) 441 54 22     Fax +46 (8) 441 54 29
GSM    +46 (706) 22 44 57


Technical support when I am not available:
AT90 AVR Applications Group: mailto:avr at atmel.com
AT91 ARM Applications Group: mailto:at91support at atmel.com
AVR32 Applications Group        mailto:avr32 at atmel.com
http://www.avrfreaks.net/;            http://avr32linux.org/
http://www.at91.com/ ;                 http://www.linux4sam.org/

[Buildroot] Modular X.org

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "John" == John Voltz <john.voltz@gmail.com> writes:

Hi,

 John> I just wanted to inform anyone who is interested, the buildroot
 John> tree over at http://code.google.com/p/buildroot can now build
 John> both modular and tiny X.org servers AND drivers. The modular X
 John> will likely only build successfully for desktop machine arches
 John> (i.e. x86, PPC?, etc.) because it requires a PCI bus.

 John> If I can recruit someone with some spare time to generate a
 John> patch against uClibc.org's tree and submit it upstream, I'm
 John> sure everyone will appreciate it.

I've now committed the relevant chunks - Thanks John.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

[Buildroot] Modular X.org

[John Voltz]

>
> I've now committed the relevant chunks - Thanks John.
>
> --
> Bye, Peter Korsgaard
>

Thanks, Peter! I'm sure it will be useful to quite a few people. Also, I
don't know if you noticed or not, but in the Google code tree I removed the
old separate xorg 6.8 and the tinyx packages. Since tinyX is part of X.org,
and 6.8 is outdated.

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://busybox.net/lists/buildroot/attachments/20080630/342959b1/attachment.htm