Re: [yocto] Why use Yocto?
Just add my few cents of using Yocto. Since yocto is tailored towards embedded system, normally it includes light weight (strip-down version/flavor) software and servers, such as sysklogd instead of syslogd and busybox cron instead of crond. Which is not a bad thing at all, as this make sure your system is less bloated. However, just be aware that when you want to make some changes to these server configurations, you need more debugging time since some of this strip-down servers does not behave as other full blown servers. Also this means that google search wont' give you good answers either since most of the answers to the existing distribution (ubuntu, debian,,,) targeted. On the other hand, this mailing list is very active, and you will get answers from other developers quickly. ISS On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Alex J Lennon ajlen...@dynamicdevices.co.uk wrote: On 10/06/2014 17:50, Marlon Smith wrote: Wow, thanks everyone for the excellent replies. I am a developer and not much of a legal guy, so pointing out the licensing issues with Ubuntu was especially helpful. It sounds like we are going to choose Yocto for our product. Further to the excellent points made by others, presumably Freescale are providing commercial support on Yocto for i.MX6 now too. I know they have a developer day coming up in the UK shortly at which Yocto is on the agenda. I also suspect they will have some ready to run binaries somewhere for download, although I can't spot them in the walled garden. They usually do, and that might even be enough for you, depending on your needs, and how custom the board variant is... Regards, Alex -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Why use Yocto?
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:52:50PM -0700, Marlon Smith wrote: Hi everyone, I'm developing a product that will run on a custom i.MX6 board and I'm trying to decide whether to use Yocto or Ubuntu (there's a version of Ubuntu packaged for the Wandboard that will run on our board). The board will run our own custom app, and we'll modify the Linux kernel to support our hardware. Ubuntu seems like it would be ready to go - just put it on an SD card, boot the board, compile the app and create a new SD card image from the result to use for manufacturing. Yocto seems like it would be easier to remove unneeded packages from, and easier to cross-compile the application for. This means we could have a smaller SD card image in the end. What are your thoughts on this? Philip has already mentioned license compliance in his reply, I'd like to add a couple of other points: - In addition to a smaller image, you should have less services running by default and so lower power usage. - It's much easier to do consistent, reproducible image builds which include your own packages. Rather than having a series of steps such as installing Ubuntu on an SD card, booting, installing required additional packages, downloading your source code to the card, building and then installing, you just do 'bitbake my-image' and everything you need is encoded in recipe files which you can keep under version control. There's less chance for human error to creep in. - You don't need to install the toolchain on the board itself, you can do the system build on a separate machine and not pollute the SD card image with the history of building your software. It saves you the time of going through and removing the things you need to build your software but aren't needed to run it, which you'll probably end up doing to reduce the image size. - You'll have a great community of people doing similar things with the Yocto Project. I don't know of a similar community for modifying Ubuntu SD card images in this fashion. Hope this helps, -- Paul Barker Email: p...@paulbarker.me.uk http://www.paulbarker.me.uk pgpLnyo5nRRda.pgp Description: PGP signature -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Why use Yocto?
Am 10.06.2014 12:38 schrieb Paul Barker p...@paulbarker.me.uk: On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:52:50PM -0700, Marlon Smith wrote: Hi everyone, I'm developing a product that will run on a custom i.MX6 board and I'm trying to decide whether to use Yocto or Ubuntu (there's a version of Ubuntu packaged for the Wandboard that will run on our board). The board will run our own custom app, and we'll modify the Linux kernel to support our hardware. Ubuntu seems like it would be ready to go - just put it on an SD card, boot the board, compile the app and create a new SD card image from the result to use for manufacturing. Yocto seems like it would be easier to remove unneeded packages from, and easier to cross-compile the application for. This means we could have a smaller SD card image in the end. What are your thoughts on this? Philip has already mentioned license compliance in his reply, I'd like to add a couple of other points: - In addition to a smaller image, you should have less services running by default and so lower power usage. This is because yocto splits documentation and not needed stuff in separate packages. In ubuntu you have to remove a lot of stuff. - It's much easier to do consistent, reproducible image builds which include This us a major feature. You can build the whole image by Jenkins or any other build server. your own packages. Rather than having a series of steps such as installing Ubuntu on an SD card, booting, installing required additional packages, downloading your source code to the card, building and then installing, you just do 'bitbake my-image' and everything you need is encoded in recipe files which you can keep under version control. There's less chance for human error to creep in. - You don't need to install the toolchain on the board itself, you can do the You can even create your own toolchain with all needed headers. And it is damn easy to remote debug your application from eclipse for example. system build on a separate machine and not pollute the SD card image with the history of building your software. It saves you the time of going through and removing the things you need to build your software but aren't needed to run it, which you'll probably end up doing to reduce the image size. - You'll have a great community of people doing similar things with the Yocto +1 Project. I don't know of a similar community for modifying Ubuntu SD card images in this fashion. And you can fine tune all those recipe and build for example a hard float or a softfloat image. It is a little bit hard to get started but if you get familiar with this. There is no alternative :) -- Christian Ege Hope this helps, -- Paul Barker Email: p...@paulbarker.me.uk http://www.paulbarker.me.uk -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Why use Yocto?
Hi Marlon, Some more points to vote for yocto: 1) ability to switch to another board easily (even with different arch) just by switching the BSP layer and optionally doing some kernel and bootloader config; 2) you can switch between package versions you want to use, plus fine-tune and patch them for your specific needs; As the downside of Yocto I can mention that baking process is quite time and resource intensive. BR, Maxim. On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Marlon Smith marlon.smit...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, I'm developing a product that will run on a custom i.MX6 board and I'm trying to decide whether to use Yocto or Ubuntu (there's a version of Ubuntu packaged for the Wandboard that will run on our board). The board will run our own custom app, and we'll modify the Linux kernel to support our hardware. Ubuntu seems like it would be ready to go - just put it on an SD card, boot the board, compile the app and create a new SD card image from the result to use for manufacturing. Yocto seems like it would be easier to remove unneeded packages from, and easier to cross-compile the application for. This means we could have a smaller SD card image in the end. What are your thoughts on this? Thanks Marlon -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Why use Yocto?
On 06/10/2014 07:25 AM, Christian Ege wrote: Am 10.06.2014 12:38 schrieb Paul Barker p...@paulbarker.me.uk mailto:p...@paulbarker.me.uk: On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:52:50PM -0700, Marlon Smith wrote: Hi everyone, I'm developing a product that will run on a custom i.MX6 board and I'm trying to decide whether to use Yocto or Ubuntu (there's a version of Ubuntu packaged for the Wandboard that will run on our board). The board will run our own custom app, and we'll modify the Linux kernel to support our hardware. Ubuntu seems like it would be ready to go - just put it on an SD card, boot the board, compile the app and create a new SD card image from the result to use for manufacturing. How dp you plan to sell/market/license your Ubuntu based machine? Would you become an Ubuntu hardware partner? http://www.ubuntu.com/partners/find-a-partner/hardware The scope of this partnership seems to be servers and desktops. I assume they also have something in the works for smart phone partners. However, I'm guessing you're building something that doesn't fit these categories. I remember seeing various demo images over the years of Ubuntu running on embedded hardware, but it always seems to fizzle out. EmbeddedUbuntu on the Ubuntu Wiki was last updated in 2009. But maybe you're talking with people at Canonical and they are telling you something different? If so, please share. Phillip brought up licensing issues, and I'm wondering whether you can roll an Ubuntu Linux box without Canonical being on board. Yocto seems like it would be easier to remove unneeded packages from, and easier to cross-compile the application for. This means we could have a smaller SD card image in the end. What are your thoughts on this? Philip has already mentioned license compliance in his reply, I'd like to add a couple of other points: - In addition to a smaller image, you should have less services running by default and so lower power usage. This is because yocto splits documentation and not needed stuff in separate packages. In ubuntu you have to remove a lot of stuff. - It's much easier to do consistent, reproducible image builds which include This us a major feature. You can build the whole image by Jenkins or any other build server. your own packages. Rather than having a series of steps such as installing Ubuntu on an SD card, booting, installing required additional packages, downloading your source code to the card, building and then installing, you just do 'bitbake my-image' and everything you need is encoded in recipe files which you can keep under version control. There's less chance for human error to creep in. - You don't need to install the toolchain on the board itself, you can do the You can even create your own toolchain with all needed headers. And it is damn easy to remote debug your application from eclipse for example. system build on a separate machine and not pollute the SD card image with the history of building your software. It saves you the time of going through and removing the things you need to build your software but aren't needed to run it, which you'll probably end up doing to reduce the image size. - You'll have a great community of people doing similar things with the Yocto +1 Project. I don't know of a similar community for modifying Ubuntu SD card images in this fashion. And you can fine tune all those recipe and build for example a hard float or a softfloat image. It is a little bit hard to get started but if you get familiar with this. There is no alternative :) -- Christian Ege Hope this helps, -- Paul Barker Email: p...@paulbarker.me.uk mailto:p...@paulbarker.me.uk http://www.paulbarker.me.uk -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org mailto:yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Why use Yocto?
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Bob Cochran yo...@mindchasers.com wrote: How dp you plan to sell/market/license your Ubuntu based machine? Would you become an Ubuntu hardware partner? http://www.ubuntu.com/partners/find-a-partner/hardware The scope of this partnership seems to be servers and desktops. I assume they also have something in the works for smart phone partners. However, I'm guessing you're building something that doesn't fit these categories. I remember seeing various demo images over the years of Ubuntu running on embedded hardware, but it always seems to fizzle out. EmbeddedUbuntu on the Ubuntu Wiki was last updated in 2009. But maybe you're talking with people at Canonical and they are telling you something different? If so, please share. i guess this is of interest for the discussion (from [1]): === 2. Your use of Ubuntu You can download, install and receive updates to Ubuntu for free. Ubuntu is freely available to all users for personal, or in the case of organisations, internal use. It is provided for this use without warranty. All implied warranties are disclaimed to the fullest extent permitted at law. You can modify Ubuntu for personal or internal use. You can make changes to Ubuntu for your own personal use or for your organisation’s own internal use. You can redistribute Ubuntu, but only where there has been no modification to it. You can redistribute Ubuntu in its unmodified form, complete with the installer images and packages provided by Canonical (this includes the publication or launch of virtual machine images). Any redistribution of modified versions of Ubuntu must be approved, certified or provided by Canonical if you are going to associate it with the Trademarks. Otherwise you must remove and replace the Trademarks and will need to recompile the source code to create your own binaries. This does not affect your rights under any open source licence applicable to any of the components of Ubuntu. If you need us to approve, certify or provide modified versions for redistribution you will require a licence agreement from Canonical, for which you may be required to pay. For further information, please contact us (as set out below). === IANAL... but i guess the last paragraph clarifies what you can do (or not). [1] http://www.canonical.com/intellectual-property-rights-policy -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Why use Yocto?
Wow, thanks everyone for the excellent replies. I am a developer and not much of a legal guy, so pointing out the licensing issues with Ubuntu was especially helpful. It sounds like we are going to choose Yocto for our product. On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 17:42 +0200, Nicolas Dechesne wrote: On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Bob Cochran yo...@mindchasers.com wrote: How dp you plan to sell/market/license your Ubuntu based machine? Would you become an Ubuntu hardware partner? http://www.ubuntu.com/partners/find-a-partner/hardware The scope of this partnership seems to be servers and desktops. I assume they also have something in the works for smart phone partners. However, I'm guessing you're building something that doesn't fit these categories. I remember seeing various demo images over the years of Ubuntu running on embedded hardware, but it always seems to fizzle out. EmbeddedUbuntu on the Ubuntu Wiki was last updated in 2009. But maybe you're talking with people at Canonical and they are telling you something different? If so, please share. i guess this is of interest for the discussion (from [1]): === 2. Your use of Ubuntu You can download, install and receive updates to Ubuntu for free. Ubuntu is freely available to all users for personal, or in the case of organisations, internal use. It is provided for this use without warranty. All implied warranties are disclaimed to the fullest extent permitted at law. You can modify Ubuntu for personal or internal use. You can make changes to Ubuntu for your own personal use or for your organisation’s own internal use. You can redistribute Ubuntu, but only where there has been no modification to it. You can redistribute Ubuntu in its unmodified form, complete with the installer images and packages provided by Canonical (this includes the publication or launch of virtual machine images). Any redistribution of modified versions of Ubuntu must be approved, certified or provided by Canonical if you are going to associate it with the Trademarks. Otherwise you must remove and replace the Trademarks and will need to recompile the source code to create your own binaries. This does not affect your rights under any open source licence applicable to any of the components of Ubuntu. If you need us to approve, certify or provide modified versions for redistribution you will require a licence agreement from Canonical, for which you may be required to pay. For further information, please contact us (as set out below). === IANAL... but i guess the last paragraph clarifies what you can do (or not). [1] http://www.canonical.com/intellectual-property-rights-policy -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Why use Yocto?
On 10/06/2014 17:50, Marlon Smith wrote: Wow, thanks everyone for the excellent replies. I am a developer and not much of a legal guy, so pointing out the licensing issues with Ubuntu was especially helpful. It sounds like we are going to choose Yocto for our product. Further to the excellent points made by others, presumably Freescale are providing commercial support on Yocto for i.MX6 now too. I know they have a developer day coming up in the UK shortly at which Yocto is on the agenda. I also suspect they will have some ready to run binaries somewhere for download, although I can't spot them in the walled garden. They usually do, and that might even be enough for you, depending on your needs, and how custom the board variant is... Regards, Alex -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
[yocto] Why use Yocto?
Hi everyone, I'm developing a product that will run on a custom i.MX6 board and I'm trying to decide whether to use Yocto or Ubuntu (there's a version of Ubuntu packaged for the Wandboard that will run on our board). The board will run our own custom app, and we'll modify the Linux kernel to support our hardware. Ubuntu seems like it would be ready to go - just put it on an SD card, boot the board, compile the app and create a new SD card image from the result to use for manufacturing. Yocto seems like it would be easier to remove unneeded packages from, and easier to cross-compile the application for. This means we could have a smaller SD card image in the end. What are your thoughts on this? Thanks Marlon -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] Why use Yocto?
On 06/09/2014 03:52 PM, Marlon Smith wrote: Hi everyone, I'm developing a product that will run on a custom i.MX6 board and I'm trying to decide whether to use Yocto or Ubuntu (there's a version of Ubuntu packaged for the Wandboard that will run on our board). The board will run our own custom app, and we'll modify the Linux kernel to support our hardware. Ubuntu seems like it would be ready to go - just put it on an SD card, boot the board, compile the app and create a new SD card image from the result to use for manufacturing. Yocto seems like it would be easier to remove unneeded packages from, and easier to cross-compile the application for. This means we could have a smaller SD card image in the end. What are your thoughts on this? How would you handle GPL compliance with Ubuntu? The Yocto project helps you track all the sources (and their licenses), patches and build scripts used to create your images. This data is critical for true GPL compliance. Philip Thanks Marlon -- ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
