Hi Janek,
I have to admit now I'm a bit more confused now and that means more reading
and experimenting.
There seems to be 2 extreme models for Beaglebone usage:
1) Beaglebone as Arduino on steroid path(low end)
2) Open Embedded path(high end)
One of the neat things about the Beaglebone is that it has such a
range of applicability. I think that makes it very challenging to
create a software distribution that makes everyone happy. FWIW, there
are other Linux options that on the spectrum between your #1 and #2
models. See the Linux section:
http://beagleboard.org/static/beaglebone/latest/README.htm
I personally use Buildroot with the Beaglebone, and I'm quite happy
with it. The main difference with buildroot is that your workflow is
building system images (rootfs images to be specific) rather than
working with a package manager. In other words, if a program is
missing from your image, with Angstrom, you can just run opkg, but
with Buildroot, you're probably going to rebuild your rootfs.
Buildroot also starts with a minimalist configuration and you build up
from there.
Having said that, I find it is easier to understand how the system
works with Buildroot. It also has a simple UI for selecting and
configuring packages which can be nice.
My hope is that Beaglebone support will be in the main Buildroot
distribution by their next release. It's taking a little longer than I
was hoping to get the patches upstream. For now, though, you can look
at my GitHub project if you're interested:
https://github.com/fhunleth/buildroot-beaglebone
Frank