Re: [yocto] beagleboard, qemuarm, beaglebone, and pandaboard images.

2013-04-16 Thread Burton, Ross
On 16 April 2013 01:00, Edward Vidal vidal.devel...@gmail.com wrote:
 beagleboard 1949 RPMs
 qemuarm 1747 RPMs
 beaglebone 1742 RPMs
 pandaboard 3842 RPMs
 Any and all help will be appreciated.

Have a look in work/[machine]/[image]/[version], you'll see
installed-pkgs.txt and complementary-pkgs.txt.  Comparing these will
tell you where the differences are.

Ross
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto


Re: [yocto] beagleboard, qemuarm, beaglebone, and pandaboard images.

2013-04-16 Thread Edward Vidal
Ross,
I did a search for installed-pkgs.txt and complementary-pkgs.txt neither of
these files were on my system.  I am assuming this is because in my
local.conf I am using INHERIT += rm_work.
as found on page 41 of the ref_manual.  What is the difference between the
two pkgs sets?  The does reduce the capabilities of the systems?  Can the
complementary-pkgs.txt be installed with a flag?
Thanks any and all help is appreciated.
Ed


On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Burton, Ross ross.bur...@intel.com wrote:

 On 16 April 2013 01:00, Edward Vidal vidal.devel...@gmail.com wrote:
  beagleboard 1949 RPMs
  qemuarm 1747 RPMs
  beaglebone 1742 RPMs
  pandaboard 3842 RPMs
  Any and all help will be appreciated.

 Have a look in work/[machine]/[image]/[version], you'll see
 installed-pkgs.txt and complementary-pkgs.txt.  Comparing these will
 tell you where the differences are.

 Ross

___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto


Re: [yocto] beagleboard, qemuarm, beaglebone, and pandaboard images.

2013-04-16 Thread Burton, Ross
On 16 April 2013 15:01, Edward Vidal vidal.devel...@gmail.com wrote:
 I did a search for installed-pkgs.txt and complementary-pkgs.txt neither of
 these files were on my system.  I am assuming this is because in my
 local.conf I am using INHERIT += rm_work.
 as found on page 41 of the ref_manual.  What is the difference between the
 two pkgs sets?  The does reduce the capabilities of the systems?  Can the
 complementary-pkgs.txt be installed with a flag?

Yes, rm_work will delete those files.

As far as I know, installed is the packages explicitly installed,
complementary is the set installed through features such as
dev-pkgs.

If you really want to find the differences on these images, boot each
and dump the installed package list (rpm -qa?).

Ross
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto


Re: [yocto] beagleboard, qemuarm, beaglebone, and pandaboard images.

2013-04-16 Thread Burton, Ross
On 16 April 2013 15:35, Edward Vidal vidal.devel...@gmail.com wrote:
 They all use EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES = debug-tweaks tools-sdk.in local.conf
 Something within the build is deciding which pkgs get installed between
 different builds.  I would expect several different RPMs but not hundreds as
 was the case.

Different BSPs can cause different packages to get pulled in, but
without seeing full package lists from each of the images nobody can
really comment on what is causing the differences.

Maybe the meta-ti kernels are building more options as modules in
their own packages?  Maybe you've found a bug in the locale package
selection? It's impossible to say without actually seeing the package
lists.

Ross
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto


Re: [yocto] beagleboard, qemuarm, beaglebone, and pandaboard images.

2013-04-16 Thread Paul Eggleton
On Tuesday 16 April 2013 15:03:50 Burton, Ross wrote:
 On 16 April 2013 15:01, Edward Vidal vidal.devel...@gmail.com wrote:
  I did a search for installed-pkgs.txt and complementary-pkgs.txt neither
  of
  these files were on my system.  I am assuming this is because in my
  local.conf I am using INHERIT += rm_work.
  as found on page 41 of the ref_manual.  What is the difference between the
  two pkgs sets?  The does reduce the capabilities of the systems?  Can the
  complementary-pkgs.txt be installed with a flag?
 
 Yes, rm_work will delete those files.
 
 As far as I know, installed is the packages explicitly installed,
 complementary is the set installed through features such as
 dev-pkgs.
 
 If you really want to find the differences on these images, boot each
 and dump the installed package list (rpm -qa?).

Or, use buildhistory:

https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Buildhistory

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto


Re: [yocto] beagleboard, qemuarm, beaglebone, and pandaboard images.

2013-04-16 Thread Burton, Ross
Hi,

Re-CCing the list so everyone else can see.

A quick comparison of the beagle and panda lists using diff shows exactly
what I was expecting.  Slightly different X configuration (omap+evdev vs
keyboard+mouse+evdev+fbdev) and a massively different kernel configuration:
the beaglebone image has 39 kernel module packages whereas the pandaboard
has 2141.

The Panda image appears to be pulling in every kernel module, instead of
the just the ones you want.  This is probably meta-ti's fault.

Ross

On 16 April 2013 15:52, Edward Vidal vidal.devel...@gmail.com wrote:

 Ross,
 I attaching the pkgslist if it will help.  Are there anything else that I
 can provide?
 Thanks
 Should these be sent to the mailing list?

  
 beagleboard_pkglist041513https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B11sthVgwfufY0l1Q05TaUJCblE/edit?usp=drive_web



 On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Burton, Ross ross.bur...@intel.comwrote:

 On 16 April 2013 15:35, Edward Vidal vidal.devel...@gmail.com wrote:
  They all use EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES = debug-tweaks tools-sdk.in
 local.conf
  Something within the build is deciding which pkgs get installed between
  different builds.  I would expect several different RPMs but not
 hundreds as
  was the case.

 Different BSPs can cause different packages to get pulled in, but
 without seeing full package lists from each of the images nobody can
 really comment on what is causing the differences.

 Maybe the meta-ti kernels are building more options as modules in
 their own packages?  Maybe you've found a bug in the locale package
 selection? It's impossible to say without actually seeing the package
 lists.

 Ross



___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto