Re: BuildRoot like tool
In addition, my goals for this project....
1. Small footprint
2. Package management of embedded systems
a. Package information not maintained on the target
b. Ability to perform field upgrades (remote maintenance)
3. Support for: x86, ARM, PPC, MIPS
a. Optionally: Blackfin, Sparc, ...
In short, use the Debian methodology as a guideline for solving the
problems of building and maintaining embedded systems. (this includes
On Jan 6, 2005, at 7:22 AM, Allen Curtis wrote:
What is the vision for the root file-system build? I assume that
everyone is familiar with uclibc's BuildRoot. Should we make
like that? Does it fit into the Debian mold?
1. I think that such a cross compilation script would be
are using something like that for our firmware.
The idea is to use a modified Debian build system. I made a proof of
about it last year. It works nicely with dpkg-cross. I am working on
version as we speak, because the last one was outdated by the changes
debhelper, dpkg, and dpkg-cross. I have to modify one more file
tonight and I
can start debugging. It should do native builds, but throw out docs,
examples of debian packages automatically, or cross-compile using
Eventually using a new meta-data dir (emdebian instead of debian) to
I believe there are 2 parts to this problem.
1. Create the initial root file-system which is "bootable" by the
2. Build additional applications to add to the initial root
The reason for the separation is the difficulty of cross compiling
some packages. It may be possible that we need to punt and compile
some packages on the target. (or in an emulated environment)
2. The question if it fits within the Debian mold follows an answer
the definition of embedded and to which systems GNU/Debian fits.
buildroot is intended for more 'deeply embedded' systems:
covers most of the basics; ensuring a very small root filesystem (<
Actually E. Andersen managed to build a full debian in there (but
but only natively. If we can do the same with the modified tools we
maybe do this natively and cross-compiled.
If this project intends to ignore "deeply" embedded systems, I am very
disappointed. In that case this is little more than supporting Linux
on Mac or Sun with the elimination of documentation.... Not very
useful for me.
I was happy to see that uclibc was used in Stag for ARM processors. I
personally believe that we should standardize on uclibc, or something
similar, with the goal of achieving the smallest footprint possible.
I think GNU/EmDebian is rather intended for slightly higher level
systems, where the choice is made to remove 'crud' from a normal
I guess you will not mind if we try using uclibc instead of glibc
for that also.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-embedded-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact