[beagleboard] Where is BeagleBone toolchain and why is it so very carefully hidden?

Why not just install a native compiler on your bone itself? That should
be fairly simple as most of the distributions many people run on bones
already have prebuilt versions of GCC.

On Debian or Ubuntu, 'build-essential' should be a good place to start.
Sorry, not as familiar with what Angstrom's or Fedora's core toolchain
are called but they probably have a similar set of packages that are
easy to install.


Have you tried these?


I found that these pre-compiled toolchains work fine for most application software, but the BeagleBone kernel recipes use some special compiler flags not supported by those toolchains. I ended up just created a new tool chain using the simple recipe:

MACHINE=beaglebone ./oebb.sh bitbake meta-toolchain

This will create an SDK image in build/tmp-angstrom_v2012_05-eglibc/deploy/sdk.

I’d rather work on a cross-compiled environment for speed any day.


I'd rather work on a cross-compiled environment for speed any day.

That's where we differ :slight_smile:
I'd rather keep my stress level down and buy a bigger/better build
machine than deal with cross dependencies. That's money well spent in
my opinion, a Panda's not a bad choice for ARM.

My opinion is that there's a time and a place for cross compiling: When
you don't yet have a native compiler built the way you want/need.
After that, native compilation wins every day.

If builds are taking too long, find smaller software :slight_smile:
(but now I digress)


You replied only to me, I'm replying to you and the beagle list.

Thanks. After a long, roundabout search, I finally stumbled upon the
Angstrom toolchain, although it appears to have 'fetch' problems with
several of the tarballs when rebuilding the kernel.

Sorry, can't help you here, not my area of expertise. Git works well
for me.

> > I'd rather work on a cross-compiled environment for speed any day

I agree with you- while a native compiler if fine for simple "hello
world" programs (IF one has the luxury of LOTS of local storage),
cross-compilation is the only practical choice when regenerating a
kernel or rootfs.

Kernel or u-boot, sure, cross compile them. They have no external lib
dependencies. Rootfs, use binary packages. They'll save you so much
time. Installing binary packages is super fast compared to rebuilding
your entire root fs. opkg is pretty decent as a packager. Or if you
like Debian or Ubuntu, dpkg is fairly nice (along with apt if you
like auto resolution of deps).

Granted, this is all just my opinion. So take it with a grain of
salt :slight_smile: