[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Setting up a Build System for ARMEL packages

Well, the eventual goal will be building both rootfs images geared
towards tablets and some debian packages. The main debian packages
I'll be building are the Enlightenment desktop with some custom
patches - and yes I will be building these at very least once or more
a week.

The more I read/hear I'm starting to think buying a Panda board will
be worth the cost.

On 6/14/11, Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> wrote:
> +++ Jeff Hoogland [2011-06-13 22:30 -0500]:
>> Howdy All,
>> I was wondering what is the best way to set up for building ARMEL
>> packages?
> That's actually a complicated question with no simple answer. It
> depends what you want to build (Debian packages, your own software,
> upstream tarballs, android stuff, openembedded stuff, buildroot
> images), and how often you want to build it (once or over and over
> again because you are working on it). And whether you are targetting
> an existing distro ABI (armel debian or ubuntu) or some other flavour
> (e.g. ARM v6+vfp).
>> I've got an N900 and I've got an Android tablet in the mail - it is
>> simplest to
>> just build on those systems themselves or will it be better in the long
>> run to
>> get some sort of build system going on my plain old laptop?
> In short, yes, it's simplest to build natively on the target
> architecture, especially if building Debian packages (Which I assume
> is your purpose - you don't say explicitly).
> This is the most reliable way of getting correct code where the target
> system is Debian armel, and is how Debian is designed to be built and
> how it is built for the distro. You have all the normal tools at your
> disposal: apt-get build-dep, dpkg-buildpackage and so on.
> But of course with currently available hardware it's not that fast.
> This is rapidly getting better, but may still be annoying if you are
> building a non-trival package repeatedly, or whole sets of packages
> (in which case the first question is why are the distro-supplied ones
> not adequate).
> Cross-building can work, is sometimes appropriate, and sometimes
> necessary. Support exists within Debian, and this is a good page to
> start on for info about what tools to use:
> https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/DevPlatform/CrossCompile/CrossBuilding
> I'm in the process of adding a 'quickstart' page to help newcomers to
> decide what approach to take. (Hmm, looks like I forgot to hit save
> before my browser crashed last time - bum - doncha just hate that...).
>> I've spent the last couple days trying to get a QEMU working but kept
>> running
>> into various road blocks. I finally got a chroot ARM environment setup
>> with
>> QEMU, however when I try to run dpkg-depcheck -d I get and strace failure
>> and a
>> QEMU failure message.
> QEMU building is no faster than native building on typical arm
> hardware unless you carefully set things up to use a native (i.e build
> architecture) compiler behind the scenes. If you want to take this
> approach I'd suggest just submitting jobs to the Open Build System
> where they have already set it all up.
> Wookey
> --
> Principal hats:  Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM
> http://wookware.org/
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: 20110614112655.GC9581@dream.aleph1.co.uk">http://lists.debian.org/20110614112655.GC9581@dream.aleph1.co.uk

Reply to: