[cip-dev] RFC: OpenEmbedded layer for CIP project

[cip-dev] RFC: OpenEmbedded layer for CIP project

[Hudson, Sean]

Hey all,

  I'm still new to the project and working my way through the email archives.  However, I've started creating a meta-cip layer to capture metadata for building the CIP project with OpenEmbedded.  This will allow it to build with the Yocto Project, as well.  I'll create a project on gitlab soon to start collecting my changes.

  Any comments, concerns or thoughts?

--
Sean

[cip-dev] RFC: OpenEmbedded layer for CIP project

[Nobuhiro Iwamatsu]

Hi!

2017-09-20 0:46 GMT+09:00 Hudson, Sean <Sean_Hudson@mentor.com>:
> Hey all,
>
>   I'm still new to the project and working my way through the email archives.  However, I've started creating a meta-cip layer to capture metadata for building the CIP project with OpenEmbedded.  This will allow it to build with the Yocto Project, as well.  I'll create a project on gitlab soon to start collecting my changes.
>
>   Any comments, concerns or thoughts?

I have not read all the archives, but CIP already has the following repository.
  https://gitlab.com/cip-playground/project-x/tree/master/deby
This is a layer based on meta-debian (deby).
I think that meta-cip based on openembedded-core does not exist yet.

>
> --
> Sean
>

Best regards,
  Nobuhiro

-- 
Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
   iwamatsu at {nigauri.org / debian.org}
   GPG ID: 40AD1FA6

[cip-dev] RFC: OpenEmbedded layer for CIP project

[Daniel Sangorrin]

Hi Sean

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cip-dev-bounces at lists.cip-project.org [mailto:cip-dev-bounces at lists.cip-project.org] On Behalf Of Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2017 5:03 AM
> To: Hudson, Sean
> Cc: cip-dev at lists.cip-project.org
> Subject: Re: [cip-dev] RFC: OpenEmbedded layer for CIP project
> 
> Hi!
> 
> 2017-09-20 0:46 GMT+09:00 Hudson, Sean <Sean_Hudson@mentor.com>:
> > Hey all,
> >
> >   I'm still new to the project and working my way through the email archives.  However, I've started creating a meta-cip layer to
> capture metadata for building the CIP project with OpenEmbedded.  This will allow it to build with the Yocto Project, as well.  I'll create
> a project on gitlab soon to start collecting my changes.
> >
> >   Any comments, concerns or thoughts?
> 
> I have not read all the archives, but CIP already has the following repository.
>   https://gitlab.com/cip-playground/project-x/tree/master/deby
> This is a layer based on meta-debian (deby).
> I think that meta-cip based on openembedded-core does not exist yet.

The Deby implementation of Project-X is using the CIP kernel and Debian Jessie source code packages.

So that means that deby uses 'bitbake' but instead of openembedded core source code (~1 year maintenance)
it uses Debian source code (~5 year maintenance). In more technical words, it uses recipes from meta-debian instead
of recipes under the meta layer.

Most probably, you can reuse most of the current implementation of Project-X by removing the meta-debian layer and
adding meta-yocto.  This can be done just by modifying the KAS project files.

We haven't decided yet officially which source code will be used for the CIP Core packages. Also we haven't decided yet what
software will be included in the CIP core packages.

Thanks,
Daniel

[cip-dev] RFC: OpenEmbedded layer for CIP project

[Chris Paterson]

Hello Sean,

> From: cip-dev-bounces at lists.cip-project.org [mailto:cip-dev-
> bounces at lists.cip-project.org] On Behalf Of Hudson, Sean
> Sent: 19 September 2017 16:46
> 
> Hey all,
> 
>   I'm still new to the project and working my way through the email archives.
> However, I've started creating a meta-cip layer to capture metadata for
> building the CIP project with OpenEmbedded.  This will allow it to build with
> the Yocto Project, as well.  I'll create a project on gitlab soon to start collecting
> my changes.
> 
>   Any comments, concerns or thoughts?

Following on from our conversations at ELC-E I wanted to reboot this thread.

Have you had a chance to look into this topic again? Did you create the gitlab project in the end?

What were you aiming to include in your meta-cip layer?

Kind regards, Chris

[cip-dev] RFC: OpenEmbedded layer for CIP project

[Sean Hudson]

On 2017-11-10 06:10 AM, Chris Paterson wrote:
> Hello Sean,
> 
>> From: cip-dev-bounces at lists.cip-project.org [mailto:cip-dev-
>> bounces at lists.cip-project.org] On Behalf Of Hudson, Sean
>> Sent: 19 September 2017 16:46
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>>   I'm still new to the project and working my way through the email archives.
>> However, I've started creating a meta-cip layer to capture metadata for
>> building the CIP project with OpenEmbedded.  This will allow it to build with
>> the Yocto Project, as well.  I'll create a project on gitlab soon to start collecting
>> my changes.
>>
>>   Any comments, concerns or thoughts?
> 
> Following on from our conversations at ELC-E I wanted to reboot this
> thread.
> 
> Have you had a chance to look into this topic again? Did you create
> the gitlab project in the end?
  I have not looked at it since I returned. I plan to start looking at
this again next week, after the US Thanksgiving holiday.  WRT to a
gitlab project, I do not have rights to create a project under the
cip-project, but it looks like Daniel created a cip-core project a few
days back, which is, at least currently, Deby focused.

> 
> What were you aiming to include in your meta-cip layer?

That's the million dollar question, IMHO.  I am thinking we start with
the usual basic components and add from there:
- kernel
- libc of some form
- shell and command line utilities, e.g. busybox/toybox
- init flavor, most likely systemd at this point
- ...

Bootloaders may be problematic as they are more intimately tied to
specific architectures.  So any selection there would need to be
considered carefully.

So, let me turn the question around, what's do companies think they will
need?

Another additional consideration for package selection would be the
licenses.  It seems like most companies are 'allergic' to GPLv3, so we
should factor that into the package selections.

-- 
Sean

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.cip-project.org/pipermail/cip-dev/attachments/20171121/cc2f57db/attachment.sig>

[cip-dev] RFC: OpenEmbedded layer for CIP project

[Jan Kiszka]

On 2017-11-21 17:22, Sean Hudson wrote:
> On 2017-11-10 06:10 AM, Chris Paterson wrote:
>> Hello Sean,
>>
>>> From: cip-dev-bounces at lists.cip-project.org [mailto:cip-dev-
>>> bounces at lists.cip-project.org] On Behalf Of Hudson, Sean
>>> Sent: 19 September 2017 16:46
>>>
>>> Hey all,
>>>
>>>   I'm still new to the project and working my way through the email archives.
>>> However, I've started creating a meta-cip layer to capture metadata for
>>> building the CIP project with OpenEmbedded.  This will allow it to build with
>>> the Yocto Project, as well.  I'll create a project on gitlab soon to start collecting
>>> my changes.
>>>
>>>   Any comments, concerns or thoughts?
>>
>> Following on from our conversations at ELC-E I wanted to reboot this
>> thread.
>>
>> Have you had a chance to look into this topic again? Did you create
>> the gitlab project in the end?
>   I have not looked at it since I returned. I plan to start looking at
> this again next week, after the US Thanksgiving holiday.  WRT to a
> gitlab project, I do not have rights to create a project under the
> cip-project, but it looks like Daniel created a cip-core project a few
> days back, which is, at least currently, Deby focused.
> 
>>
>> What were you aiming to include in your meta-cip layer?
> 
> That's the million dollar question, IMHO.  I am thinking we start with
> the usual basic components and add from there:
> - kernel
> - libc of some form
> - shell and command line utilities, e.g. busybox/toybox

I didn't find usage of toybox so far.

> - init flavor, most likely systemd at this point

I wouldn't bet on systemd yet - unless it comes from a major distro. ;)

> - ...

Crypto libs...

> 
> Bootloaders may be problematic as they are more intimately tied to
> specific architectures.  So any selection there would need to be
> considered carefully.
> 
> So, let me turn the question around, what's do companies think they will
> need?

It will likely take a bit more time, but we are currently trying
internally to pull a couple of platforms together over a common core
layer and then provide that list also as input to CIP for further
discussions.

> 
> Another additional consideration for package selection would be the
> licenses.  It seems like most companies are 'allergic' to GPLv3, so we
> should factor that into the package selections.

It's getting harder and harder to actually avoid GPLv3 these days. At
the same time, legal departments are gaining more understanding about
where it can be "interesting" and where it's just yet another license.

More problematic now are inconsistently licensed packages. License
hygiene is key now (see e.g. kernel firmware removal, also from CIP).
That are at least my impressions.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA ITP SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux