[yocto] proper recipe for building for beagle xM? meta-ti?

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 05:22:30PM -0500, William Mills wrote:
> 
> 
> On 02/28/2012 05:28 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >
> >>Op 28 feb. 2012, om 22:55 heeft Robert P. J. Day het volgende geschreven:
> >>
> >>>On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>It is true that the beagleboard is a hardware reference board in the
> >>>>yocto consolidated kernel tree and meta-yocto layers. That means
> >>>>that it gets the yocto standard QA builds and boot testing.
> >>>>
> >>>>That being said, if you are looking for the latest + specific
> >>>>features then you've been pointed in a good direction .. meta-ti
> >>>>will meet your needs.
> >>>>
> >>>>As for disentangling and reducing questions in this area .. rest
> >>>>assured, we are working on it.
> >>>  ok, that's perfectly reasonable -- meta-yocto provides a generic,
> >>>well-tested product, while the meta-ti layer provides more
> >>>leading-edge content, correct?
> >>No, the amount of testing is not the difference, the amount of
> >>support for the board is. Meta-ti supports the camera interfaces, 3d
> >>engine, dsp, crypto engines, expansion boards, etc. Meta-yocto lacks
> >>all that for beagleboard.
> >   i understand that reasonably well, and i'll make one more
> >observation, then i'll shut up.
> >
> >   i cloned the meta-ti layer into my yocto clone, and here's the
> >majority of the meta-ti README:
> >
> >===== start
> >
> >This layer depends on:
> >
> >URI: git://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core
> >branch: master
> >revision: HEAD
> >
> >URI: git://git.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded
> >branch: master
> >revision: HEAD
> >
> >URI: git://git.angstrom-distribution.org/meta-angstrom
> >branch: master
> >revision: HEAD
> >
> >Currently meta-ti only works with the Angstrom distribution and hence
> >requires the meta-angstrom layer. There are known issues when using
> >gcc-4.6 based toolchain from OpenEmbedded-Core, thus gcc-4.5
> >toolchain, provided by meta-openembedded, is needed. It is planned to
> >fix these shortcomings in the near future and allow building the base
> >BSP part of meta-ti with different distributions and layer stacks,
> >such as: distro-less (only with OE-Core), with Yocto/Poky, with
> >Angstrom or Arago.
> >
> >Due to the above, it is now recommended to follow the instructions at
> >http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/building-angstrom
> >
> >This will set it up for the OpenEmbedded-core layout instead of the
> >old "Classic" OpenEmbedded-dev layout. You can optionally tweak
> >sources/layers.txt and conf/bblayers.conf to (de)select BSP layers.
> >
> >===== end
> >
> >   by the time i'm done reading that, i'm not sure whether i've been
> >told i can use yocto as long as i do the necessary prep first, or that
> >i should give up on yocto and just use angstrom directly.  i'm fine
> >with either approach, but the README seems to just waffle *totally* on
> >which strategy to use.
> >
> >   quite simply, that README seems to provide nothing but more
> >confusion than anything else.
> 
> Congratulations you are the first beta tester for the new README.txt
> language :) (patched two days ago).

Actually, he is the first one to complain about the meat (i.e. added one 
paragraph with 3 statements) - everyone else before him was complaining about 
not enough info in the README, hence the addition.

-- 
Denys