On 04/16/2010 01:50 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:33:40AM -0400, Dengyi Wang wrote:
Personally, I prefer Fedora 12. I believe it's more close to MeeGo's image.
(RPM based). Any comments?
Why not just use MeeGo to develop it? That works for me. And again,
just because the distro is RPM based, doesn't mean that MeeGo is based
on it at all.
thanks,
greg k-h
Hi Greg,
There is two issues in your email.
1) Yes, I suggest Fedora 12 as the host for MeeGo chroot. If developers
do not have any prefer among Fedora/Ubuntu/Opensuse/Debian/... they will
prefer the upstream points one robust environment to use, so they can
focus on the real development instead of the environment setup.
2) Your question is my question too, in the reverse way. :-) Why use
MeeGo chroot for development? I agree it has big advantage like,
self-contain, no host contamination, easy development. On the other
hand, it has its own drawback. I can think 2 of them.
2.1) When MeeGo image is changed, developers will receive a new
development image, then they need to replace their own development
environment with the new one. It's annoy for application developers.
2.2) For the automatic build, I didn't see a good way to run scripts
between the host and chroot jail.
Intel used to have Moblin SDK, which is cross-compile + sysroot. I
prefer that way. And it could be used for ARM development too.
Regards,
Dengyi
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
