[oe] Ideas for scripts, to save work, when building several boards

Koen Kooi k.kooi at student.utwente.nl
Thu Aug 13 12:44:29 UTC 2009


On 13-08-09 14:10, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
> Koen Kooi skrev:
>> On 13-08-09 12:07, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
>>> Koen Kooi skrev:
>>>> On 13-08-09 09:13, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
>>>>> Since I will need to test multiple boards,
>>>>> I decided to write some scripts which I will
>>>>> check in later today in origin/ulf/linux-2.6.30.2
>>>>>
>>>>> I generated a "MAKEALL" script which will
>>>>> source a file "board_list.sh" with board build commands
>>>>>
>>>>> <SOF>
>>>>> build_board    sam9263dfc    x11-gpe-image
>>>>> build_board    sam9g45ek    opie-image
>>>>> build_board    sam9g10df    x11-gpe-image
>>>>> build_board    sam9g20dfc    console-image
>>>>> build_board    sam9260dfc    console-image
>>>>> build_board    sam9261df    x11-image
>>>>> build_board    sam9xedfc    console-image
>>>>> <EOF>
>>>>
>>>> You do know that you can do that with MACHINE=foo bitbake bar, right?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Didn't try that.
>>> I assume this means that the cross compiler is not rebuilt,
>>
>> Unless you poked at the gcc recipes, no, it won't get rebuilt.
>>
>>> Is the root fs assembled from ipks then?
>>
>> if you use rootfs_ipk.bbclass, yes.
>>
>> Note that the official angstrom buildguide has mentioned that for years:
>> http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/building-angstrom
>>
>
> Thanks for helping out, but it does not work as expected.
>
> I first create a local.conf for the at91sam9261df
> and bitbake x11-image.
> Then I do "MACHINE=at91sam9g20dfc bitbake console-image".
> A console-image is built,but for the at91sam9261df,
> which is stored in "tmp/deploy/glibc/images/at91sam9261df"
>
> The bitbake does not generate u-boot/kernel or at91bootstrap
> for the at91sam9260dfc

Then either our uboot/kernel/bootstrap recipes are wrong, or your 
machine configs lack proper IMAGE_DEPENDS, either way that isn't the 
fault of doing MACHINE=foo

> I believe that most at91 chips can use the same file system,
> so it makes sense to do it this way anyway.

The images are built for the machine you specified with MACHINE, I 
suspect you are getting confused somewhere.





More information about the Openembedded-devel mailing list