On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 13:32:11 -0300
There's a reason why Qt is not already in Emdebian Crush . . . .
> Thanks Neil for the detailed reply. I now understand what you mean. I
> have this situation: My major objective of installing Emdebian Crush
> on the ARM board was to run Qt for Embedded Linux on the board. Since
> Qt need to be configured and built after downloading .tar file, and
> in absence of g++ or gcc running on the board, I wont be able to do
> it. This is what I want to do
> - http://doc.qtsoftware.com/4.5/qt-embedded-install.html
Then use Emdebian Grip - although you'll need to be running armel. I'm
> Is there an alternative to having Qt installed on my board? Which of
> the follwoing two alternative you suggest or any other you have in
> your mind.
> 1. I dont mind a bigger (up to 70 - 80MB) filesystem but should have
> ability to compile and build packages.
working on adding the relevant -dev packages and support tools for Grip
but you can always pull in the packages from Debian Sid instead because
Grip is binary compatible with Debian.
See multistrap or the Grip installation guides.
> I was wondering if I can use
> # debootstrap --arch arm lenny /RootFS
Your /etc/inittab needs adjustment before packing up the files to
> to create a filesystem and then create a jffs2 image from it and use
> it. I tried it and it loads the filesystem just fine on the baord but
> after that an error comes up - unable to open initial console.
create the image.
You have a chance to modify any file before you create the image.
> the file system created this way has no inittab under etc folder. I
> wonder if you can comment on what in addition i must do to do this
> file system work. Emdebian used Busybox initailly, I dont know what
> the filesystem created like this is using.
Using Crush for Qt is not a practical option.
> 2. Second option is to keep using Emdebian Crush , configure and make
> Qt for arm on my Debian desktop, bring entire Qt folder to arm board
> and then just do a make install on the board. I am absolutely
> clueless, if it is a good (workable) option at all or it sounds very