Hi Diego,
On 03/21/2014 04:49 AM, Diego wrote:
Otavio Salvador wrote:
Eric Nelson wrote:
A simplistic test shows that it's really straightforward to
add both Chromium and Firefox into fsl-image-gui by pulling
in meta-browser.
The biggest problem adding more stuff is maintenance. This increases
build time and tests needed for a good coverage.
What people think?
Hi Otavio and Eric,
I think we can sum up your discussion in two points:
- web applications and in general browser usage is really important nowadays
in general, and it is taking its share of interest also in the embedded world;
- firefox and chromium require quite a lot of resources both in terms of
maintenance and in terms of build time and computation.
I can confirm both points, as we have a couple of projects using Chromium. So
on one hand it is something important to support and test regularly (and that
would help finding build breakages), on the other hand build takes a lot time,
and an overwhelming amount of RAM. I used to build images with Firefox and
Chromium 29 with 6 bitbake build threads and it worked on a 4GB of RAM and 2GB
swap, but now with Chromium 35 I had to pump up the VM to 12GB of RAM (8GB
still killed the final ld linking process, which is the real "RAM eater").
So while testing browsers would be nice, I think the best option would be to
test it somehow separately from the fsl-image-gui. Do you think defining an
image in meta-browser would make sense?
I wasn't suggesting that Chromium or Firefox be included in
fsl-image-gui. Only that meta-browser (and I think meta-gnome as a
dependency) be included in the default manifest.
This will prevent the need to "git clone" the repositories separately,
and allow inclusion through local.conf.
Regards,
Eric
--
_______________________________________________
meta-freescale mailing list
meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
