headers
ispiam | 3 Jun 08:11
Picon

Gentoo on PC/104


Hello all,

Our platform is a PC/104 (x86) with additional boards (analog and digital
I/O, serial ports, ethernet, etc.)

We are thinking of using gentoo as OS. Do you know what are the
advantages/disadvantages of using this Linux distribution over the others?
(Suse, Ubuntu, Redhat, etc.) any recommendation for an embedded OS?

And if so, what development tools should I use to develop my applications?

Thank you in advance!
--

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Gentoo-on-PC-104-tp17536249p17536249.html
Sent from the gentoo-embedded mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Karl Hiramoto | 3 Jun 08:43
Gravatar

Re: Gentoo on PC/104

ispiam wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Our platform is a PC/104 (x86) with additional boards (analog and digital
> I/O, serial ports, ethernet, etc.)
>   
> We are thinking of using gentoo as OS. Do you know what are the
> advantages/disadvantages of using this Linux distribution over the others?
> (Suse, Ubuntu, Redhat, etc.) any recommendation for an embedded OS?
>   
Well of course gentoo is very customizable.  You should decide if you 
want to use uclibc or glibc (Depending on your RAM, Flash/Disk 
storrage).  Other distros AFIK don't have the option to use uclibc.

Perhaps you should read:

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/embedded/handbook/
http://gentoo-wiki.com/TinyGentoo
http://gentoo-wiki.com/Embedded_Gentoo

Another option is to roll your own with buildroot, and if you want 
"packages" use ipkg.

> And if so, what development tools should I use to develop my applications?
>   
Gcc, and make.?  :-)

Some people like eclipse.
> Thank you in advance!
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Peter Stuge | 6 Jun 22:05
Picon

Re: Gentoo on PC/104

On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 11:11:54PM -0700, ispiam wrote:
> We are thinking of using gentoo as OS. Do you know what are the
> advantages/disadvantages of using this Linux distribution over the
> others?
> (Suse, Ubuntu, Redhat, etc.) any recommendation for an embedded OS?

I like Gentoo a lot.

Especially with an x86 system, catalyst is quite handy to build the
system image.

> And if so, what development tools should I use to develop my
> applications?

Nothing can beat C IMO, so gcc and if you want GUI your favorite
toolkit.

//Peter
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ned Ludd | 21 Jun 17:33
Picon
Favicon

Cross Wrappers

Mike,

Ok with how you have SYSROOT + ROOT + PORTAGE_CONFIG working I think
I've been able to come up with a decent set of cross compile wrappers
that should be usable by everybody for the ideal cross compile setups.
No more of the 'xmerge' foo. This should do it right. 

I want you to review.. And then tell me if it should be apart of
crossdev or another pkg. 

Thanks in advance.

http://dev.gentoo.org/~solar/embedded/cross-wrappers-20080621.tar.bz2

--

-- 
Ned Ludd <solar@...>
Permalink | Reply | 10 comments |
headers
Jason | 21 Jun 21:26
Gravatar

Re: Cross Wrappers

Ned Ludd wrote:
[snip]
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~solar/embedded/cross-wrappers-20080621.tar.bz2

Wow.  Amazing.

thx,

Jason.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
andreas.sumper | 21 Jun 22:01
Picon
Favicon

AUTO: Andreas Sumper/CNSystems is out of office (returning 01.07.2008)


I am out of the office until 01.07.2008.

Hello,

I am out of office from <Tag 1 Abwesenheit> to <letzter Tag der
Abwesenheit> and will therefore not be able to answer your e-mail.
In urgent cases please contact <office@...>

Best regards,
Andreas Sumper

Note: This is an automated response to your message [gentoo-embedded] Cross
Wrappers sent on 08.6.21 5:33:57 PM.
This is the only notification you will receive while this person is away.
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Mike Frysinger | 22 Jun 05:29
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: Cross Wrappers

On Saturday 21 June 2008, Ned Ludd wrote:
> Ok with how you have SYSROOT + ROOT + PORTAGE_CONFIG working I think
> I've been able to come up with a decent set of cross compile wrappers
> that should be usable by everybody for the ideal cross compile setups.
> No more of the 'xmerge' foo. This should do it right.

for pkg-config, you may want to merge many of the things ive done here:
http://blackfin.uclinux.org/gf/project/uclinux-dist/scmsvn/?action=browse&path=%2Ftrunk%2Ftools%2Fstaging-pkg-config&revision=5937&view=markup

for the configure tests, ive been meaning to investigate switching over to a 
config.site rather than exporting them through the environment ...

you should change the shebang to #!/bin/bash for all of those since they arent 
POSIX ... easier that way too

for the CHOST, how about checking $0 ?  so people can symlink like:
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-emerge
and then they can just run that without needing anything set in the 
environment ... that's how i generally multiplex my cross scripts for 
multiple targets.

we could have crossdev manage the symlinks automatically as well so they get 
the ...-emerge and ...-pkg-config by default.  and setup the 
PORTAGE_CONFIGROOT too ...

> I want you to review.. And then tell me if it should be apart of
> crossdev or another pkg.

crossdev should be fine i think
-mike
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 6 comments |
headers
Mike Frysinger | 22 Jun 05:30
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: AUTO: Andreas Sumper/CNSystems is out of office (returning 01.07.2008)

On Saturday 21 June 2008, andreas.sumper@... wrote:
> I am out of the office until 01.07.2008.

fix your automated response else we'll have to scrub you from the list
-mike
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ned Ludd | 22 Jun 07:14
Picon
Favicon

Re: Cross Wrappers


On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 23:29 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Saturday 21 June 2008, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > Ok with how you have SYSROOT + ROOT + PORTAGE_CONFIG working I think
> > I've been able to come up with a decent set of cross compile wrappers
> > that should be usable by everybody for the ideal cross compile setups.
> > No more of the 'xmerge' foo. This should do it right.
> 
> for pkg-config, you may want to merge many of the things ive done here:
> http://blackfin.uclinux.org/gf/project/uclinux-dist/scmsvn/?action=browse&path=%2Ftrunk%2Ftools%2Fstaging-pkg-config&revision=5937&view=markup

Ok I snagged the error checking and QA check.

> for the configure tests, ive been meaning to investigate switching over to a 
> config.site rather than exporting them through the environment ...

I'll see what I can snag from here.
https://dev.openwrt.org/browser/trunk/include/site (hate traq)
Any tips/links to some others?

> you should change the shebang to #!/bin/bash for all of those since they arent 
> POSIX ... easier that way too

ok

> for the CHOST, how about checking $0 ?  so people can symlink like:
> x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-emerge and then they can just run that without 
> needing anything set in the 
> environment ... that's how i generally multiplex my cross scripts for 
> multiple targets.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Mike Frysinger | 22 Jun 12:12
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: Cross Wrappers

On Sunday 22 June 2008, Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 23:29 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Saturday 21 June 2008, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > for the configure tests, ive been meaning to investigate switching over
> > to a config.site rather than exporting them through the environment ...
>
> I'll see what I can snag from here.
> https://dev.openwrt.org/browser/trunk/include/site (hate traq)
> Any tips/links to some others?

it's just an idea i had floating around.  havent actually looked into 
implementation details.  but if another project is already maintaining the 
site files, then we should push our little differences to them and then just 
start using their work ;).

> > for the CHOST, how about checking $0 ?  so people can symlink like:
> > x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-emerge and then they can just run that without
> > needing anything set in the
> > environment ... that's how i generally multiplex my cross scripts for
> > multiple targets.
>
> I have it right now as emerge-CHOST.
> I figured the logic there that CHOST-* should be mostly 
> reserved for the toolchain, plus it's easier for me to emerge-\t\t and
> pull in the right wrapper foo for whatever I'm working on.

i think having it all be CHOST- prefixed rather than suffixed is better for 
consistency.  or just provide both :).

> When you run emerge-wrapper --init
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |

Gmane