Hello,
I have had success using autotools to build programs for Overo.
Since most of the stuff I have been doing is not strictly specific to
Overo hardware, a nice advantage of autotools is the ability to build
the software for my desktop Linux machine for testing, and then build
for Overo using the exact same source code and automake files. The
ability to run on a desktop machine saves lots of time, because it's not
necessary to transfer the programs to the Overo each time you want to
run them.
I use the Anjuta IDE in Ubuntu to edit the source code and build the
software.
When it's time to deploy to Overo for testing, I take a template Bitbake
recipe, and prepare a package. (For simple programs, the Bitbake recipe
just needs the line "inherit autotools" and nothing else.) Then I
transfer the ipk file to the Overo using a micro SD card, install and run.
Aside from the learning curve associated with autotools, it seems to be
a fairly painless and efficient way to operate. Anjuta IDE helps by
automatically creating all of the configure and automake files initially.
I briefly read about using a network filesystem to transfer files to and
from Overo. Does anyone do it this way? Is there any advantage?
Regards,
Markus.
On 2010.08.18 23:56, Dave Hylands wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 4:56 PM, ScottEllis
> <scottellis.developer@...> wrote:
>> Yes. Search for Hello World (non-bitbake based ;-)
>>
>> http://www.gumstix.net/wiki/index.php?title=Category:How_to_-_Build_helloworld
>>
>> A little more serious, if you built an Overo image, you now have all the
>> tools available on your workstation to do cross-compiled builds. It's just a
>> matter of pointing a Makefile at the cross-build tools. That link has an
>> example Makefile.
>>
>> I write lots of Overo programs, but never use bitbake for my own stuff.
>>
>> There are plenty of other folks who prefer to write recipes and use bitbake
>> for building their own programs. To me that's too cumbersome and not what
>> I'm used to, but that's a preference.
>>
>> You get the same executable code at the end of the day.
> I agree with Scott. The cycle time for developing new code using
> bitbake is way more than just using straight make.
>
> If you take a look at my gpio and gpio-event projects, you'll see an
> example of how to build using make tied into the cross-compiler tools
> in OE.
> <http://www.gumstix.net/wiki/index.php?title=User_GPIO_Driver>
> <http://www.gumstix.net/wiki/index.php?title=GPIO_Event_Driver>
>
> I also happened to create bitbake files which can also be used.
>
> I followed the directions on the hello-world link Scott mentioned, and
> I put my files over here:
> <http://svn.hylands.org/linux/oe/user.collection/recipes/> (look in
> helloworld and hellomake)
>
|