theKompany.rom - Need to dispurse workload more...

[lardman]

Mickey (I think) you are suggesting that everyone adopts a shared base distribution (as you say, the bits under the GUI - sysvinit, getty, tinylogin, busybox, etc.) and presumably kernels too. However this may prove slightly painful for most other ROMs if they are to transition as they are all still built with GCC 2.95 and libc 2.2. That\'s not to say I don\'t think it\'s a good idea, I think that to continue to be a viable platform everyone will have to eventually move on as OZ is doing (that\'s not meant in a \'so there\' kind of way) and it will also pool kernel and base system development and stability work.


Si

[abednego]

Hi there,

Ahm... I might be mistaken, but I think that this discussion is heading in the wrong direction.  :roll:

If I read it correctly, Mickey\'s point was not to \"assimilate\" the tkcROM into the Opie/OpenZaurus collective. As far as I understood, he simply pointed out, that using OpenEmbedded (which is a tool, not only a distribution) as the building environment for the tkcROM. OE in itself can (probably) be configured to use gcc2.95 and libc2.2 as well as the gcc3.x and libc2.3 libraries of the OZ team.

In the wiki-statement on the OpenEmbedded-website there is some explanation (http://www.openembedded.org/phpwiki/index.php/OpenEmbeddedBlurb).
If i read it correctly, the environment is highly configurable and one should also be able to set it up to build SharpROM-compatible ROMs - such as the tkcROM was and probably will be. (Or will it be called \"BlueEmber\"?)

However, I am not a real developer myself so I might be wrong - and I have not used OE yet, though I plan on learning to in the next months. Thus, all I want to say is: Discussing the transformation of tkcROM to OZ doesn\'t help anyone - it\'s not what proto (or Mickey) wanted. (Correct me if I\'m wrong.)

So long,
Abed

[ced]

I\'ve downloaded the today snapshot of the OE system. I\'ve compiled few packages and it\'s quite easy to use (e.g: oebuild filename.oe).

I was wondering what do I need to do after all my \"oebuild\"s to be able to create a rootfs file and my additional ipks? what do I need to do with the \"buildroot\" tree? I\'ve done a \"make menuconfig\" but most of the libraries/programs are grey out... do I need to create links with the \"oe-packages/base/tmp\" directory?

...don\'t worry I\'m not planning to create a new rom! just want to test the OE structure.

I\'m happy to help if proto want to move to the OE system. I think OE it\'s a really good distribution/build system.

[Mickeyl]

Abed and Ced got it right - that\'s what I wanted to say. ced, after calling oebuild (or oemake which builds the stuff automatically honoring the dependencies provided you populate the OEFILES environment variable with a list of available .oe\'s) you can use e.g. INHERIT=package_tar oemake to package tar\'s and then oeinstall to install them into a rootfs. Then use oeimage to get a flashable image out of that rootfs. The latter steps are under constructions but should work. For more details, feel free to ask or hop by on #oe (irc.freenode.net)

[Mickeyl]

Yeah, what I should add... all those different tools will (hopefully) eventually be called by a nice menu-based GUI frontend

[lardman]

My mistake.

Si

[Anonymous]

Native Qtopia in all honesty just sucks in many cases as well for usability and overall polish...  

Are you talking about Qtopia 1.7? Because it is much better than 1.5

[ced]

Thanks Mickeyl.

I can\'t access to IRC due to my companie firewall policy... so do you have an example script? or a document about it?