Hello all,
It seems that the external-linaro-toolchain recipe (in meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain) doesn't work unless TI's meta-arago/meta-arago-extras layer is also present. That layer contains, among other things:
meta-arago-extras/recipes-devtools/meta/ * external-linaro-toolchain.bbappend - seems to fix a variety of packaging errors, and relaxes the requirement that external-linaro-toolchain itself provide libc Linux headers * external-linaro-sdk-toolchain.bb - provides the cross-canadian toolchain, for building nativesdk packages. My understanding is that part is useable when the host machine is the same as the SDK machine (e.g. both x86_64-linux), since otherwise you would need two external toolchains. * external-linaro-toolchain-cross.bb - seems to just provides some tweaks * external-linaro-bfd-version.inc - populates ELT_VER_BFD with the detected version
meta-arago-extras/conf/distro/include/ * tclibc-external-linaro-toolchain.inc - the TCLIBC configuration that tells Yocto you're using the external Linaro glibc, instead of having Yocto built it.
Is my understanding correct? If so, I'd be curious to know why these files are in meta-arago, as opposed to just being moved into meta-linaro-toolchain itself. If it's just due to a lack of time, then I'd be more than willing to help out. As things currently exist, I find the 'external-linaro-toolchain' recipe in meta-linaro to be a bit of a "carrot on a stick" - it looks really promising and enticing, but you can't get it to work without lots of effort. That effort ultimately amounts to implementing the changes that are present in meta-arago-extras...
Thank you, Chris Laplante
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 08:02:05PM +0000, chris.laplante@agilent.com wrote:
Hello all,
It seems that the external-linaro-toolchain recipe (in meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain) doesn't work unless TI's
Well, it works for the most part, for what it needs to do. As I have replied to OE-Core list http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2017-October/14368... the issue is mostly that the prebuilt binary toolchain keeps on changing from version to version, hence needs constant updating. I've upstreamed a lot of fixes for this in the past to meta-linaro-toolchain. But not everything can be upstreamed.
meta-arago/meta-arago-extras layer is also present. That layer contains, among other things:
Is my understanding correct? If so, I'd be curious to know why these files are in meta-arago, as opposed to just being moved into meta-linaro-toolchain itself. If it's just due to a lack of time, then I'd be more than willing to help out. As things currently exist, I find the 'external-linaro-toolchain' recipe in meta-linaro to be a bit of a "carrot on a stick" - it looks really promising and enticing, but you can't get it to work without lots of effort. That effort ultimately amounts to implementing the changes that are present in meta-arago-extras...
The files you have listed in meta-arago make a lot of assumptions and contain historic cruft that is specific to TI SDK and the way Arago configures and uses things. TI SDKs have been using external toolchains for a long time since CodeSourcery and OpenEmbedded-Classic and I've been maintaining this usage since then, even before meta-linaro-toolchain existed. As I said, most of what is generic, I already upstreamed, but customizations and some "controversial" features had to stay in meta-arago - some were discussed before and rejected. I'll try to go over this again and see if anything else can be upstreamed...
BTW, I saw your discussion with Alex on IRC few days ago, but couldn't reply, as most of the OpenEmbedded and Yocto Project developers were in Prague this week for OEDEM, ELCE and YPDD, including myself and meta-linaro maintainers.
Thanks for chiming in Denys. I also talked briefly with Chris on IRC about this and I came to wonder what the benefits of using TI's external toolchain today are. I would prefer using the internal toolchain from OE as it appears to have more active upstream activity.
May I get some comment on this from you?
Appreciated,
Adam
-----Original Message----- From: OpenEmbedded [mailto:openembedded-bounces@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of Denys Dmytriyenko Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 11:48 AM To: chris.laplante@agilent.com Cc: openembedded@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: external-linaro-toolchain and TI's meta-arago/meta-argao-extra
*EXTERNAL EMAIL*
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 08:02:05PM +0000, chris.laplante@agilent.com wrote:
Hello all,
It seems that the external-linaro-toolchain recipe (in meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain) doesn't work unless TI's
Well, it works for the most part, for what it needs to do. As I have replied to OE-Core list http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2017-October/14368... the issue is mostly that the prebuilt binary toolchain keeps on changing from version to version, hence needs constant updating. I've upstreamed a lot of fixes for this in the past to meta-linaro-toolchain. But not everything can be upstreamed.
meta-arago/meta-arago-extras layer is also present. That layer contains, among other things:
Is my understanding correct? If so, I'd be curious to know why these files are in meta-arago, as opposed to just being moved into meta-linaro-toolchain itself. If it's just due to a lack of time, then I'd be more than willing to help out. As things currently exist, I find the 'external-linaro-toolchain' recipe in meta-linaro to be a bit of a "carrot on a stick" - it looks really promising and enticing, but you can't get it to work without lots of effort. That effort ultimately amounts to implementing the changes that are present in meta-arago-extras...
The files you have listed in meta-arago make a lot of assumptions and contain historic cruft that is specific to TI SDK and the way Arago configures and uses things. TI SDKs have been using external toolchains for a long time since CodeSourcery and OpenEmbedded-Classic and I've been maintaining this usage since then, even before meta-linaro-toolchain existed. As I said, most of what is generic, I already upstreamed, but customizations and some "controversial" features had to stay in meta-arago - some were discussed before and rejected. I'll try to go over this again and see if anything else can be upstreamed...
BTW, I saw your discussion with Alex on IRC few days ago, but couldn't reply, as most of the OpenEmbedded and Yocto Project developers were in Prague this week for OEDEM, ELCE and YPDD, including myself and meta-linaro maintainers.
-- Denys _______________________________________________ OpenEmbedded mailing list OpenEmbedded@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded
Yes, thank you both for your work and help. Also for the historical context.
I suppose we don't really have a "killer" reason to use an external toolchain. Two of the reasons we were interested in it was (1) to get GCC 7 and (2) so that developers could compile things for our boards without necessarily having to setup a Yocto environment or SDK. When GCC 7 support is added to Yocto, we'll likely just switch to that.
Thanks again, Chris
-----Original Message----- From: Lee, Yong [mailto:Yong.Lee@johnsonoutdoors.com] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 1:12 PM To: Denys Dmytriyenko denis@denix.org; LAPLANTE,CHRIS (A-Little Falls,ex1) chris.laplante@agilent.com Cc: openembedded@lists.linaro.org Subject: RE: external-linaro-toolchain and TI's meta-arago/meta-argao-extra
Thanks for chiming in Denys. I also talked briefly with Chris on IRC about this and I came to wonder what the benefits of using TI's external toolchain today are. I would prefer using the internal toolchain from OE as it appears to have more active upstream activity.
May I get some comment on this from you?
Appreciated,
Adam
-----Original Message----- From: OpenEmbedded [mailto:openembedded-bounces@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of Denys Dmytriyenko Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 11:48 AM To: chris.laplante@agilent.com Cc: openembedded@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: external-linaro-toolchain and TI's meta-arago/meta-argao-extra
*EXTERNAL EMAIL*
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 08:02:05PM +0000, chris.laplante@agilent.com wrote:
Hello all,
It seems that the external-linaro-toolchain recipe (in meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain) doesn't work unless TI's
Well, it works for the most part, for what it needs to do. As I have replied to OE-Core list http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2017-October/14368... the issue is mostly that the prebuilt binary toolchain keeps on changing from version to version, hence needs constant updating. I've upstreamed a lot of fixes for this in the past to meta-linaro-toolchain. But not everything can be upstreamed.
meta-arago/meta-arago-extras layer is also present. That layer contains, among other things:
Is my understanding correct? If so, I'd be curious to know why these files are in meta-arago, as opposed to just being moved into meta-linaro-toolchain itself. If it's just due to a lack of time, then I'd be more than willing to help out. As things currently exist, I find the 'external-linaro-toolchain' recipe in meta-linaro to be a bit of a "carrot on a stick" - it looks really promising and enticing, but you can't get it to work without lots of effort. That effort ultimately amounts to implementing the changes that are present in meta-arago-extras...
The files you have listed in meta-arago make a lot of assumptions and contain historic cruft that is specific to TI SDK and the way Arago configures and uses things. TI SDKs have been using external toolchains for a long time since CodeSourcery and OpenEmbedded-Classic and I've been maintaining this usage since then, even before meta-linaro-toolchain existed. As I said, most of what is generic, I already upstreamed, but customizations and some "controversial" features had to stay in meta-arago - some were discussed before and rejected. I'll try to go over this again and see if anything else can be upstreamed...
BTW, I saw your discussion with Alex on IRC few days ago, but couldn't reply, as most of the OpenEmbedded and Yocto Project developers were in Prague this week for OEDEM, ELCE and YPDD, including myself and meta-linaro maintainers.
-- Denys _______________________________________________ OpenEmbedded mailing list OpenEmbedded@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 11:44 AM, chris.laplante@agilent.com wrote:
Yes, thank you both for your work and help. Also for the historical context.
I suppose we don't really have a "killer" reason to use an external toolchain. Two of the reasons we were interested in it was (1) to get GCC 7 and (2) so that developers could compile things for our boards without necessarily having to setup a Yocto environment or SDK. When GCC 7 support is added to Yocto, we'll likely just switch to that.
gcc7 is there in OE-Core rocko release.
Thanks again, Chris
-----Original Message----- From: Lee, Yong [mailto:Yong.Lee@johnsonoutdoors.com] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 1:12 PM To: Denys Dmytriyenko denis@denix.org; LAPLANTE,CHRIS (A-Little Falls,ex1) chris.laplante@agilent.com Cc: openembedded@lists.linaro.org Subject: RE: external-linaro-toolchain and TI's meta-arago/meta-argao-extra
Thanks for chiming in Denys. I also talked briefly with Chris on IRC about this and I came to wonder what the benefits of using TI's external toolchain today are. I would prefer using the internal toolchain from OE as it appears to have more active upstream activity.
May I get some comment on this from you?
Appreciated,
Adam
-----Original Message----- From: OpenEmbedded [mailto:openembedded-bounces@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of Denys Dmytriyenko Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 11:48 AM To: chris.laplante@agilent.com Cc: openembedded@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: external-linaro-toolchain and TI's meta-arago/meta-argao-extra
*EXTERNAL EMAIL*
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 08:02:05PM +0000, chris.laplante@agilent.com wrote:
Hello all,
It seems that the external-linaro-toolchain recipe (in meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain) doesn't work unless TI's
Well, it works for the most part, for what it needs to do. As I have replied to OE-Core list http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2017-October/14368... the issue is mostly that the prebuilt binary toolchain keeps on changing from version to version, hence needs constant updating. I've upstreamed a lot of fixes for this in the past to meta-linaro-toolchain. But not everything can be upstreamed.
meta-arago/meta-arago-extras layer is also present. That layer contains, among other things:
Is my understanding correct? If so, I'd be curious to know why these files are in meta-arago, as opposed to just being moved into meta-linaro-toolchain itself. If it's just due to a lack of time, then I'd be more than willing to help out. As things currently exist, I find the 'external-linaro-toolchain' recipe in meta-linaro to be a bit of a "carrot on a stick" - it looks really promising and enticing, but you can't get it to work without lots of effort. That effort ultimately amounts to implementing the changes that are present in meta-arago-extras...
The files you have listed in meta-arago make a lot of assumptions and contain historic cruft that is specific to TI SDK and the way Arago configures and uses things. TI SDKs have been using external toolchains for a long time since CodeSourcery and OpenEmbedded-Classic and I've been maintaining this usage since then, even before meta-linaro-toolchain existed. As I said, most of what is generic, I already upstreamed, but customizations and some "controversial" features had to stay in meta-arago - some were discussed before and rejected. I'll try to go over this again and see if anything else can be upstreamed...
BTW, I saw your discussion with Alex on IRC few days ago, but couldn't reply, as most of the OpenEmbedded and Yocto Project developers were in Prague this week for OEDEM, ELCE and YPDD, including myself and meta-linaro maintainers.
-- Denys _______________________________________________ OpenEmbedded mailing list OpenEmbedded@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded _______________________________________________ OpenEmbedded mailing list OpenEmbedded@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded
For us it was mostly customer requirement to have external prebuilt toolchain. Having said that, I still have few things to fix for gcc 7 in our code.
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 06:44:56PM +0000, chris.laplante@agilent.com wrote:
Yes, thank you both for your work and help. Also for the historical context.
I suppose we don't really have a "killer" reason to use an external toolchain. Two of the reasons we were interested in it was (1) to get GCC 7 and (2) so that developers could compile things for our boards without necessarily having to setup a Yocto environment or SDK. When GCC 7 support is added to Yocto, we'll likely just switch to that.
Thanks again, Chris
-----Original Message----- From: Lee, Yong [mailto:Yong.Lee@johnsonoutdoors.com] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 1:12 PM To: Denys Dmytriyenko denis@denix.org; LAPLANTE,CHRIS (A-Little Falls,ex1) chris.laplante@agilent.com Cc: openembedded@lists.linaro.org Subject: RE: external-linaro-toolchain and TI's meta-arago/meta-argao-extra
Thanks for chiming in Denys. I also talked briefly with Chris on IRC about this and I came to wonder what the benefits of using TI's external toolchain today are. I would prefer using the internal toolchain from OE as it appears to have more active upstream activity. May I get some comment on this from you?
Appreciated,
Adam
-----Original Message----- From: OpenEmbedded [mailto:openembedded-bounces@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of Denys Dmytriyenko Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 11:48 AM To: chris.laplante@agilent.com Cc: openembedded@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: external-linaro-toolchain and TI's meta-arago/meta-argao-extra
*EXTERNAL EMAIL*
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 08:02:05PM +0000, chris.laplante@agilent.com wrote:
Hello all,
It seems that the external-linaro-toolchain recipe (in meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain) doesn't work unless TI's
Well, it works for the most part, for what it needs to do. As I have replied to OE-Core list http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2017-October/14368... the issue is mostly that the prebuilt binary toolchain keeps on changing from version to version, hence needs constant updating. I've upstreamed a lot of fixes for this in the past to meta-linaro-toolchain. But not everything can be upstreamed.
meta-arago/meta-arago-extras layer is also present. That layer contains, among other things:
Is my understanding correct? If so, I'd be curious to know why these files are in meta-arago, as opposed to just being moved into meta-linaro-toolchain itself. If it's just due to a lack of time, then I'd be more than willing to help out. As things currently exist, I find the 'external-linaro-toolchain' recipe in meta-linaro to be a bit of a "carrot on a stick" - it looks really promising and enticing, but you can't get it to work without lots of effort. That effort ultimately amounts to implementing the changes that are present in meta-arago-extras...
The files you have listed in meta-arago make a lot of assumptions and contain historic cruft that is specific to TI SDK and the way Arago configures and uses things. TI SDKs have been using external toolchains for a long time since CodeSourcery and OpenEmbedded-Classic and I've been maintaining this usage since then, even before meta-linaro-toolchain existed. As I said, most of what is generic, I already upstreamed, but customizations and some "controversial" features had to stay in meta-arago - some were discussed before and rejected. I'll try to go over this again and see if anything else can be upstreamed...
BTW, I saw your discussion with Alex on IRC few days ago, but couldn't reply, as most of the OpenEmbedded and Yocto Project developers were in Prague this week for OEDEM, ELCE and YPDD, including myself and meta-linaro maintainers.
-- Denys _______________________________________________ OpenEmbedded mailing list OpenEmbedded@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded
See my reply here for switching to internal toolchain: http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2017-October/14368...
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 05:11:40PM +0000, Lee, Yong wrote:
Thanks for chiming in Denys. I also talked briefly with Chris on IRC about this and I came to wonder what the benefits of using TI's external toolchain today are. I would prefer using the internal toolchain from OE as it appears to have more active upstream activity. May I get some comment on this from you?
Appreciated,
Adam
-----Original Message----- From: OpenEmbedded [mailto:openembedded-bounces@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of Denys Dmytriyenko Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 11:48 AM To: chris.laplante@agilent.com Cc: openembedded@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: external-linaro-toolchain and TI's meta-arago/meta-argao-extra
*EXTERNAL EMAIL*
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 08:02:05PM +0000, chris.laplante@agilent.com wrote:
Hello all,
It seems that the external-linaro-toolchain recipe (in meta-linaro/meta-linaro-toolchain) doesn't work unless TI's
Well, it works for the most part, for what it needs to do. As I have replied to OE-Core list http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2017-October/14368... the issue is mostly that the prebuilt binary toolchain keeps on changing from version to version, hence needs constant updating. I've upstreamed a lot of fixes for this in the past to meta-linaro-toolchain. But not everything can be upstreamed.
meta-arago/meta-arago-extras layer is also present. That layer contains, among other things:
Is my understanding correct? If so, I'd be curious to know why these files are in meta-arago, as opposed to just being moved into meta-linaro-toolchain itself. If it's just due to a lack of time, then I'd be more than willing to help out. As things currently exist, I find the 'external-linaro-toolchain' recipe in meta-linaro to be a bit of a "carrot on a stick" - it looks really promising and enticing, but you can't get it to work without lots of effort. That effort ultimately amounts to implementing the changes that are present in meta-arago-extras...
The files you have listed in meta-arago make a lot of assumptions and contain historic cruft that is specific to TI SDK and the way Arago configures and uses things. TI SDKs have been using external toolchains for a long time since CodeSourcery and OpenEmbedded-Classic and I've been maintaining this usage since then, even before meta-linaro-toolchain existed. As I said, most of what is generic, I already upstreamed, but customizations and some "controversial" features had to stay in meta-arago - some were discussed before and rejected. I'll try to go over this again and see if anything else can be upstreamed...
BTW, I saw your discussion with Alex on IRC few days ago, but couldn't reply, as most of the OpenEmbedded and Yocto Project developers were in Prague this week for OEDEM, ELCE and YPDD, including myself and meta-linaro maintainers.
-- Denys _______________________________________________ OpenEmbedded mailing list OpenEmbedded@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded
-
chris.laplante＠agilent.com -
Denys Dmytriyenko -
Khem Raj -
Lee, Yong