1 2 3 Previous Next 30 Replies Latest reply on Aug 9, 2015 5:44 AM by AlexT_Intel

    Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?

    cgkades

      I ask because I have spent a week trying to figure out why gphoto2 won't compile into yocto. I've researched and read many of the various doc's scattered around Intel and Yocto and OpenEmbedded. I've been on the IRC chat in #ycoto. I've spent a lot of time with 0 results and a whole lot of frustration. Even if you don't want to use any other packages or add anything else but bitbake image-full, once you get the OS running, doing anything as simple as setting up wifi is a huge pain. I've followed all the doc's and nothing is where it should be or working the way it should. Why is intel supporting this horrible OS? I understand it's nice to have the 'packages' built locally for this. But really, to do anything custom is almost impossible. You have to dig into other peoples code and create patches. You have to understand compilation errors. You have to understand the unhelpful yocto build fail messages. You have to read endlessly to understand how to write your own recipe (which is extremely difficult). All of this to add a simple package. gphoto2. Why not use and support a highly supported commonly used OS. I'm going to use ubuntu for this example, just because they have so much support. It may not be the absolute best option for whatever reasons you can come up with, but here is what it provides. Usable package management. If intel set up and supported a build box for common packages, it would be easy for them to support it. All of the packages have already been written, they just need to be built for i586 (lots of them are for i686 and this causes lots of issues).

        • 1. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
          rgb

          Hi cgkades

          You don't have to use the standard Yocto image you can use the  IoT XDK Yocto image and the Intel Development tools Intel® XDK IoT Edition | Intel® Developer Zone. There are at least two ports of Debian (Anderson galileo-debian / Wiki / Home and EmuTex EmutexLabs) and a port of Gentoo [Update] Galileo Gentoo Linux dd-Image freely available - 08-2016. You can also run windows 8 on it with windows development tools. Windows Developer Program for IoT

          I found using AlexT's version of Yocto which includes the development toolkit  Updated Galileo "devtools" image is out works fine for my purposes.

          regards

          rgb

          • 2. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
            cgkades

            Thanks for the links. I just wish intel would support one of them (debian or gentoo). Both look to be having some issues. Debian based ones are running into the i586/i686 issues and the gentoo one is running into kernel issues.

            • 3. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
              rgb

              Hi CGKades

              I can understand your frustration, and went through my own period of frustration with Galileo and Yocto, but over time have figured out most of its quarks and find it to be suitable for what I am trying to do.

              I don't have any connection with Intel, except as a user of their products, but would guess that the small memory footprint and the way the BusyBox system makes it easy to build special purpose systems, like including Arduino emulation that nobody else has done, is why they picked Yocto. For my purposes, having a way for students to create projects in Python that are more advanced than they did with Arduino boards, and allowing me to make use of the large number of Arduino shields and sensors we have purchased, Yocto on the Galileo meets my needs. I looked at a number of different distributions on the Galileo (as well as some other boards running different OSs), tried to create different projects that students could do, and ran into problems, so went back to AlexT's version. I found ti to be quite speedy,adaptable and, when combined with the EmuTex wiring_x86 system, allows for use of almost all of the sensors and actuators we have or are purchasing. If all you want to do is add gphoto2 to the distribution, I  would suggest you look at AlextT.s version of Yocto. It has development tools that have allowed me to add just about anything I need. Alex has also been very supportive at including other packages and can probably help you port gphoto2. AlexT_Intel If it doesn't meet your needs, I can well understand, as one size doesn't fit all, which is why there are makers. :-)

              rgb

              • 4. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
                AlexT_Intel

                Yeah, I have gphoto2 on my list already, haven't yet added to the repo.

                • 5. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
                  jaapcrezee

                  Hi,

                   

                  We are also using a Intel Galileo Gen2 board in one of our prototypes. Because we think Yocto is way bloated for what we need and/or making actual lean-and-mean fimware images we compiled our own cross toolchain using crosstool-ng. After that we built your own kernel and Buildroot based rootfs with it and this works quite nicely. If you are interested, send me an email; I can point you to some more information.


                  Regards,


                  Jaap Crezee

                  ZUPR BV

                  • 6. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
                    rgb

                    Hi

                    If your comment isn't a scam, which it looks to be, you can open a discussion, provide the links and attach files. However, since your profiles says you first became a member the same day as your posting and the webpage of ZUPR ZUPR - intro looks like it was thrown together at the last minute, has no real information and lists no products, it looks very suspicious, to say the least.

                    rgb

                    • 7. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
                      jaapcrezee

                      Too bad you did not put any effort in finding out who I am ; unfortunately your name "rgb" is not of much use to do such thing from my side.

                      You think I am telling you ******** and/or posting some scam? Think our website is put together in the last minute? You may be right! Just like any normal business it takes time to develop something.

                      Actual hardware != website though.

                      You want more information? You'll get it. I will create a new topic about how to build your own Galileo software using other software than Yocto. Stay tuned.

                      Oh and btw: yeah, post 1, but I just have to start somewhere right....

                      • 8. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
                        rgb

                        A complete description with links to software would be a much more professional response that the original posting or your response  If you are legitimate, than you have my apology and I look forward to seeing something concrete.

                        rgb

                        • 10. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
                          cgkades

                          Still dealing with this atrocious OS and this ALMOST real CPU. Yocto sucks, and most of the debian packages are actually i686 even though they say i386. This board is driving me nuts. If i wasn't forced to support it, I'd be using a raspberry pi.

                          • 11. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
                            rgb

                            Do you have a specific problem or are you just venting?

                            I just finished a class where 8 teams of students made quite innovative products with the Galileo, so it can do a lot, including most things the Raspberry Pi can do (Just not video -For my examples I ported a lot of Raspberry Pi code) and some the Raspberry would have difficulty with. As always, one needs to pick the right tool for the job.

                            Just out of curiosity, why do you “have” to use the Galileo.

                            rgb

                            • 12. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
                              cgkades

                              To answer you last question about why I have to use the Galileo: Intel is sponsoring the project that I'm working on. Not sure how much more I can get into about it since my frustrations reflect my own opinion and not that of the company that is being sponsored.

                               

                              1) adding anything besides what is available is a huge pain. example: libgphoto2 and gphoto2. You have to be extremely good with c/c++ and make files and troubleshoot the issues converting from make to bitbake.

                              2) I have not found a way to get kernel headers on the system

                              3) I have a kernel module that needs the source for the headers modified... good luck figuring out where that is.

                              4) How the heck do you enable the watchdog timer? I have searched the forums, and the only thing on here does not work. The guide shows a usage guide, but not a way to enable it.

                              5) You have to spend hours researching to figure out how to do ANYTHING with yocto, and even then it doesn't work (for examples see above).

                               

                               

                               

                              So while my last post was more venting than anything.. I do have examples to back up my frustrations.

                              • 13. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
                                rgb

                                Intel_PeterCMata_IntelAlexT_Intel  (Hi Peter, CMata & Alex - sorry to bother you but maybe you can help cgkades)


                                I can well understand your frustration. I had a lot of problems when I first started with the Galileo. I also like the Raspberry and use it with some students (who are learning programming) and the Galileo with others (who are more focused on hardware)  I would suggest when you run into problems like you mentioned, and can't find the answer on-ling, start another discussion, as not likely some of the really knowledgeable people will read this, and  click on mention and try to get some of the people who work with the issues you are having like Intel_Peter, AlexT, CMata and others

                                 

                                I mostly dabble around in Python, so haven't had a lot of problems lately. The specific applications I needed for my classes were added to the Yocto distribution by AlexT, so most of the problems that caused me major headaches a year or so ago have been solved..

                                Finally, you don't have to use Yocto. There are a number of different distributions and I played with a number of them until settling on Yocto, but your case is different than mine, so may not be the best for you. Hopefully the experts I mentioned at the start can help you

                                Sorry can't be of more help

                                Good Luck

                                rgb.

                                • 14. Re: Any plans on moving away from yocto? or cross supporting something else?
                                  AlexT_Intel

                                  Hey cgkades,

                                   

                                  Let me start with easy ones:

                                  2) To get kernel headers you just install kernel-dev package from my repo (if you use my image based on 1.0.4 or the 1.0.4 itself). Not sure about the DevKit image, which recently became officially (and only) supported, but they have a package repo too, just try opkg update && opkg install kernel-dev.

                                  3) After they're installed, ernel headers are in /usr/include, just like any other Linux

                                   

                                  And other ones are:

                                  1) What exactly is a problem when compiling libgphoto and gphoto2? Which image you're compiling this on? DevKit image should theoretically be more friendly for this piece, but I'd expect my devtools image to be able to compile it as well. Please post details (compilation logs, errors), better in a separate dedicated thread, and we'll go from there. You don't have to use Yocto to build those, you can just compile it from sources like on any Linux computer, the whole toolchain is available.

                                  4) There're not enough details in your question for me to answer specifically, but if you're talking about standard Linux watchdog framework, then it's just the standard Linux way - enable it in the kernel config (how to do that? see Quark BSP build guide, or just search the forum - there were several threads on this. Or just ask if you didn't find that. This is Linux, not Yocto). There's a thread that actually has all the info and I even see you;ve found it (How about enable watchdog in Quark?). There "enable" means Linux kernel config. Just see the BSP build guide, it has all this information.

                                  1 2 3 Previous Next