Hi all, hi Khem, Am Do, 19. Aug 2021, um 00:22, schrieb Khem Raj: > On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 3:06 PM Manuel Wagesreither <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > > > I'm building an image to run on various SBCs and would like to equip it > > with a graphical interface. > > > > There are quite a few things very unclear to me. Can someone help me with > > that? > > > > * Why is X11 enabled by setting an IMAGE_FEATURE (namely x11, x11-base or > > x11-sato), while Wayland is enabled by IMAGE_INSTALL only (weston-init and > > weston)? > > x11-* features is primarily to control what kind of x11 packages you > want to include in image e.g. > ./meta/recipes-sato/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-x11-sato.bb is > pulled in when x11-sato is added to IMAGE_FEATURES > we have many X11 based images and sato is one of them so thats why its > separated out. > Okay, so if I get things right then IMAGE_FEATURES+="x11" is under the hood nothing more than an IMAGE_INSTALL+="packagegroup-core-x11". Is that right? If so, what's the purpose of adding the concept of IMAGE_FEATURE? I mean, it doesn't make things SO much easier. Setting an IMAGE_FEATURE or an IMAGE_INSTALL variable is the same to me.
> you should really is looking at DISTRO_FEATURES e.g. wayland distro > feature is needed for core-image-weston to build. > Yepp, I know. I left them out on purpose because I was mainly interested in where the configuration for X11 and wayland differs conceptually. With "conceptually" I mean that one is added through IMAGE_FEATURES while the other is through IMAGE_INSTALL. > > * Theory: Is IMAGE_FEATURE +=x11 manipulating IMAGE_INSTALL under the hood > > so you don't have to do it manually? And as there is no IMAGE_FEATURE > > "wayland", you have do it manually. Correct? > > * Why is Wayland different in that it doesn't need an IMAGE_FEATURE to > > enable it? > > there are not many wayland based compositors or images we have in core > as of now. > And if there would be more wayland based compositors or images then you would turn extract this into an IMAGE_FEATURE as well? Why? How does that make things easier? Again, I feel there's something to IMAGE_FEATURES I didn't yet understand. > > * Why does core-image-weston.bb need to enable IMAGE_FEATURE hwcodec, while > > core-image-x11.bb does not? (Dunfell branch.) > > openGL is needed for wayland/weston to work too but hwcodec feature is > infact to pull in machine specific drivers MACHINE_HWCODECS into image > if a given BSP defined it. > e.g. intel bsps define vaapi codecs and mediasdk for specific machines > via MACHINE_HWCODECS > defaults for this image features are empty Thanks for the explanation on MACHINE_HWCODEC. I'm curious, so is core-image-x11 require DISTRO_FEATURE hwcodec or not? If yes, than it seems to be missing in the core-image-x11.bb (it's in the core-images-weston.bb, after all), if no, then why is it not required for X11? I know I'm asking quite detailed questions, but I got the feeling I need to understand this once and for all. Thanks, regards, Manuel
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#54542): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/54542 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/84983962/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
