Hello,
A few of us met in San Francisco for a meeting about the Yocto Project this week. Grant Likely is writing an article for LWN that will have a lot more detail. Beagle came up because it is one of the reference platforms used by Yocto at the moment. FWIW, I pushed for it to remain so over Panda (though I like both) because of the relative larger base of BeagleBoards and because of the relative ease of supply of boards. If you haven't played with Yocto (or OpenEmbedded) it is worth doing so I think, given where this is all headed 
Jon.
I've heard of Yocto only in passing. I'm assuming it's another
bitbake-based metabuild system? Is there some reasoning why
Meego/Linaro/OpenEmbedded/Angstrom/Custom Builds cannot fill the
requirements of Yocto? I don't mean that harshly at all - I'm just
curious about the evolution and true target audiences of these projects.
It's nice to have choices, but developers should have some idea of the
differences so they can choose wisely when just starting.
My limited analysis has been that OE is target agnostic, Meego focused
on Intel and Linaro on ARM, with the latter two also adding higher level
application frameworks similar in concept to Android. Is that about
right? Where does Yocto fit in this?
Michael J. Hammel <mjhammel@graphics-muse.org> [2010-12-03 11:01:27]:
Hi,
I've heard of Yocto only in passing. I'm assuming it's another
bitbake-based metabuild system? Is there some reasoning why
Meego/Linaro/OpenEmbedded/Angstrom/Custom Builds cannot fill the
requirements of Yocto? I don't mean that harshly at all - I'm just
curious about the evolution and true target audiences of these projects.
It's nice to have choices, but developers should have some idea of the
differences so they can choose wisely when just starting.
Richard wrote nice summary[1], it's worth reading and it might answer your
questions as well 
1. http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2010-November/026598.html
-- ynezz
Michael J. Hammel<mjhammel@graphics-muse.org> [2010-12-03 11:01:27]:
Hi,
I've heard of Yocto only in passing. I'm assuming it's another
bitbake-based metabuild system? Is there some reasoning why
Meego/Linaro/OpenEmbedded/Angstrom/Custom Builds cannot fill the
requirements of Yocto? I don't mean that harshly at all - I'm just
curious about the evolution and true target audiences of these projects.
It's nice to have choices, but developers should have some idea of the
differences so they can choose wisely when just starting.
Richard wrote nice summary[1], it's worth reading and it might answer your
questions as well
1. http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2010-November/026598.html
-- ynezz
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Beagle Board" group.
To post to this group, send email to beagleboard@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to beagleboard+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/beagleboard?hl=en.
May we know roughly how many paid resources are behind Yocto?
Which arch will be first officially supported? Will it be ATOM as Poky
is really part of Intel? Beagle/ARM will be done by the community
instead?
I can provide some answers for this part of the query.
In the 0.9 release, we already support the following arches:
- x86(64), mips, arm and powerpc
These are all based on a 2.6.34 kernel base (with an option
for 2.6.37-rcX shortly). There are simulated targets for
each arch, and a hardware reference for each as well
(for ARM the reference hardware is the beagleboard).
Hope that helps,
Bruce
Will try it on my beagle.
I failed to find info on other hardware reference platform. And I
found 0.9 has an ATOM download as
well(http://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/downloads/yocto-0.9/).
Additionally, http://autobuilder.pokylinux.org:8010/ is not working.
Thanks,
Xianghua