From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail5.wrs.com (mail5.windriver.com [192.103.53.11]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D49B719B3; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 18:37:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail5.wrs.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id uB5IbDUr029585 (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK); Mon, 5 Dec 2016 10:37:13 -0800 Received: from soho-mhatle-m.local (172.25.36.230) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.294.0; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 10:37:12 -0800 To: Brian Avery , , , References: From: Mark Hatle Organization: Wind River Systems Message-ID: <2c6bdf61-0227-a6a8-5455-5533dbfbbd38@windriver.com> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 12:37:11 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Openembedded-architecture] RFC BuildAppliance future X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2016 18:37:14 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 12/5/16 12:04 PM, Brian Avery wrote: > Please note, this is going out to 3 lists in an attempt to insure that no one > who would be impacted by this change misses it. Implied spam apology included. > > The Yocto Project currently provides a virtual machine image called the Build > Appliance > (https://downloads.yoctoproject.org/releases/yocto/yocto-2.2/build-appliance/). > This image can be run using either VirtualBox or VMware. It enables you to build > and boot a custom embedded Linux image with the Yocto Project on a non-Linux > development system. It is not intended for day to day development use, but > instead, is intended to allow users to “try out” the tools even if they do not > have access to a Linux system. What are the requirements for a Windows user to use this, instead of the VM approach. (In the past it was easy for a Windows user to get the VM, and just run it to test out things.) --Mark > We are considering replacing the VM based Build Appliance with a set of > containers (https://hub.docker.com/r/crops/poky/, or if you want a user > interface (https://hub.docker.com/r/crops/toaster-master/ ). These containers > currently provide most of the functionality of the Build Appliance and should > shortly be at feature parity with the Build Appliance. We are actively adding > to and supporting the containers as some of our developers are using them in > their day to day development in order to benefit from the host isolation and > ease with which other distributions can be tested. > > This is an RFC to see what features in the Build Appliance are important to > you but would not be provided by the container solutions. If the community > would be just as content using the container approach as using the VM based > Build Appliance image, then we’d be better off deprecating the Build Appliance > and applying those resources elsewhere. If there are important features the > Build Appliance provides which the container solution does not, or cannot > provide, we’d love to hear what they are! > > 
Thanks in advance for any feedback, > > -Brian > > an Intel Employee > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-architecture mailing list > Openembedded-architecture@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-architecture >