On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 1:55 AM, Lauri Leukkunen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 24/07/08 10:33 -0500, E Robertson wrote: >> So is there any strategy to resume the fun? One of the biggest problem >> with SB2 as I see it is lack of documentation that really describes >> it (especially the differences) wrt SB1. I wouldn't mind helping in >> this area if I understood more of it. Unfortunately, It was only until >> I took a look at OE that I realize what SB2 was trying to do, less the >> toolchain ( by the way, the last time I checked CodeSourcery toolchain >> didn't support uClibc). What little documentation is has is focused >> on Maemo and I've never used this SDK because from what I've seen it's >> too bulky. Maybe soon I'll be motivated to take another stab at SB2. > > Maybe we should put together an openembedded SDK using SB2, then we would > have two big sample SDKs demonstrating two different roles SB2 can play. > > Maemo SDK+ would demonstrate the heavy weight use with fully controlled build > tools, debian packaging and all of the cross-compilation problem solving > being done by SB2. > > OEwSB2 would be built so that OE's own build system is used to provide the > binary rootfs and then SB2 would be used for compiling individual > applications or libraries on top of it, using the OE provided toolchain. > This would be akin to the SDK provided by Apple for iPhone etc, basically > useful for developing applications for a device that has a released software > with APIs that are not expected to be broken. For developing the core OE > part, one would probably prefer to do it in OE's own build framework, but for > the apps SB2 could provide a useful way to allow cross-compiling without > having to integrate the app to OE itself.
That sounds like a pretty good idea and a good place to start. Perhaps you could laborate on some details I wouldn't mind taking on this challenge. Especially the setup part and how you think it should work. > > The same could be done for debian-armel too. Maybe trying to replace the > native builds with SB2 for them is not realistic(?), but producing a nice way > of developing software directly for it wouldn't hurt. > > /lauri > _______________________________________________ > Scratchbox-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.scratchbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scratchbox-users > _______________________________________________ Scratchbox-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scratchbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scratchbox-users
