[oe] Working with OEMs
Michael Smith
msmith at cbnco.com
Tue Feb 9 21:47:28 UTC 2010
C Michael Sundius wrote:
> Further, I wonder if there are others out there who also feel
> this way? My understanding is that Monta Vista is using OE; are there voices
> on this list from MV or others that use OE for creating a consistent means
> of building for developers and Config/Release Managers? If so, what are your
> tricks and complaints with respect to this issue.
Hi Mike,
I'm using COLLECTIONS, the srctree and gitver classes, plus amend.inc. I
think all of the above come from Chris at MV. It's about three billion
times better than the custom build system we had before.
We have four trees:
- public: playground for new recipes before submitting to OE; also,
amend.inc's to tweak packaging behaviour or configure flags.
- private: recipes to build closed-source drivers from our suppliers;
- oe: full org.openembedded.dev;
- proj: git repos for internal projects get cloned here, and added to
COLLECTIONS with wildcards
Building the internal projects with OE means they barely even need to be
cross-compile aware. All they need is a simple Makefile, and a git tag
to set the package version. It's way easier than writing a one-off build
system for each project.
The only problem is that bitbake takes forever to start up: COLLECTIONS
causes a re-exec of Python, I think, and there are about 8,000 recipes
in the tree. But we get around it by passing in a specific recipe file
with -b.
For release management, I have a class that creates a list of the .deb
packages that would have gone into an image, and a script that checks
them into the right place in CVS. If you use Angstrom I think you get
the same list for free every time you build an image. The class just
saves me from waiting for rootfs to run.
Mike
More information about the Openembedded-devel
mailing list