[Openembedded-architecture] RFC: Non-Linux BSPs and/or non-standard architectures

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 02:44:57PM -0700, akuster808 wrote:
> 
> 
> On 05/11/2017 02:18 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> >All,
> >
> >Somewhat related to the other Yocto Project Compliance 2.0 discussion, I
> >have a question about supporting non-Linux BSPs or BSPs with both Linux and
> >non-Linux targets. I've noticed there's some support for "baremetal" builds.
> >What about non-standard architectures? Will that affect Compliance factors in
> >any way?
> 
> I would have to say the Project would have to change its scope and
> definition.
> 
> "The Yocto Project is an open source collaboration project that
> provides templates, tools and methods to help you create custom
> Linux-based systems for embedded products regardless of the hardware
> architecture. "
> 
> Non-standard Arch is fine, non Linux is not.

Like I mentioned above - there's currently support in OE-Core for "baremetal" 
builds, which are not really Linux...


> >Just to provide some specific examples - I'm trying to determine feasibility
> >and validity of adding meta-ti support for RTOS OS on TI existing platforms,
> >as well as adding C6x-architecture DSP-based platforms to meta-ti that can
> >only do RTOS. Unfortunately, support for C6x architecture is not proper, as
> >from OE perspective it's not a new architecture, but instead just a hacked up
> >ARM one, that uses own toolchain, kernel and so on. Yes, it's not clean, but
> >it is what it is at this point... I don't expect these new platforms to affect
> >regular Linux builds or conflict with other BSPs. But still, wanted to run it
> >by the community for any comments. Thanks.
> >
>