Why use Yocto?

Why use Yocto?

[Marlon Smith]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 746 bytes --]

Hi everyone,

I'm developing a product that will run on a custom i.MX6 board and I'm
trying to decide whether to use Yocto or Ubuntu (there's a version of
Ubuntu packaged for the Wandboard that will run on our board).  The
board will run our own custom app, and we'll modify the Linux kernel to
support our hardware.

Ubuntu seems like it would be ready to go - just put it on an SD card,
boot the board, compile the app and create a new SD card image from the
result to use for manufacturing.

Yocto seems like it would be easier to remove unneeded packages from,
and easier to cross-compile the application for.  This means we could
have a smaller SD card image in the end.

What are your thoughts on this?

Thanks

Marlon

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1033 bytes --]

Re: Why use Yocto?

[Philip Balister]

On 06/09/2014 03:52 PM, Marlon Smith wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I'm developing a product that will run on a custom i.MX6 board and I'm
> trying to decide whether to use Yocto or Ubuntu (there's a version of
> Ubuntu packaged for the Wandboard that will run on our board).  The
> board will run our own custom app, and we'll modify the Linux kernel to
> support our hardware.
> 
> Ubuntu seems like it would be ready to go - just put it on an SD card,
> boot the board, compile the app and create a new SD card image from the
> result to use for manufacturing.
> 
> Yocto seems like it would be easier to remove unneeded packages from,
> and easier to cross-compile the application for.  This means we could
> have a smaller SD card image in the end.
> 
> What are your thoughts on this?

How would you handle GPL compliance with Ubuntu? The Yocto project helps
you track all the sources (and their licenses), patches and build
scripts used to create your images. This data is critical for true GPL
compliance.

Philip


> 
> Thanks
> 
> Marlon
> 
> 
> 

Re: Why use Yocto?

[Paul Barker]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2213 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:52:50PM -0700, Marlon Smith wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I'm developing a product that will run on a custom i.MX6 board and I'm
> trying to decide whether to use Yocto or Ubuntu (there's a version of
> Ubuntu packaged for the Wandboard that will run on our board).  The
> board will run our own custom app, and we'll modify the Linux kernel to
> support our hardware.
> 
> Ubuntu seems like it would be ready to go - just put it on an SD card,
> boot the board, compile the app and create a new SD card image from the
> result to use for manufacturing.
> 
> Yocto seems like it would be easier to remove unneeded packages from,
> and easier to cross-compile the application for.  This means we could
> have a smaller SD card image in the end.
> 
> What are your thoughts on this?

Philip has already mentioned license compliance in his reply, I'd like to add a
couple of other points:

- In addition to a smaller image, you should have less services running by
  default and so lower power usage.

- It's much easier to do consistent, reproducible image builds which include
  your own packages. Rather than having a series of steps such as installing
  Ubuntu on an SD card, booting, installing required additional packages,
  downloading your source code to the card, building and then installing, you
  just do 'bitbake my-image' and everything you need is encoded in recipe files
  which you can keep under version control. There's less chance for human error
  to creep in.

- You don't need to install the toolchain on the board itself, you can do the
  system build on a separate machine and not pollute the SD card image with the
  history of building your software. It saves you the time of going through and
  removing the things you need to build your software but aren't needed to run
  it, which you'll probably end up doing to reduce the image size.

- You'll have a great community of people doing similar things with the Yocto
  Project. I don't know of a similar community for modifying Ubuntu SD card
  images in this fashion.

Hope this helps,

-- 
Paul Barker

Email: paul@paulbarker.me.uk
http://www.paulbarker.me.uk

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 484 bytes --]

Re: Why use Yocto?

[Christian Ege]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3144 bytes --]

Am 10.06.2014 12:38 schrieb "Paul Barker" <paul@paulbarker.me.uk>:
>
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:52:50PM -0700, Marlon Smith wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I'm developing a product that will run on a custom i.MX6 board and I'm
> > trying to decide whether to use Yocto or Ubuntu (there's a version of
> > Ubuntu packaged for the Wandboard that will run on our board).  The
> > board will run our own custom app, and we'll modify the Linux kernel to
> > support our hardware.
> >
> > Ubuntu seems like it would be ready to go - just put it on an SD card,
> > boot the board, compile the app and create a new SD card image from the
> > result to use for manufacturing.
> >
> > Yocto seems like it would be easier to remove unneeded packages from,
> > and easier to cross-compile the application for.  This means we could
> > have a smaller SD card image in the end.
> >
> > What are your thoughts on this?
>
> Philip has already mentioned license compliance in his reply, I'd like to
add a
> couple of other points:
>
> - In addition to a smaller image, you should have less services running by
>   default and so lower power usage.
>
This is because yocto splits documentation and not needed stuff in separate
packages. In ubuntu you have to remove a lot of stuff.
> - It's much easier to do consistent, reproducible image builds which
include
This us a major feature. You can build the whole image by Jenkins or any
other build server.
>   your own packages. Rather than having a series of steps such as
installing
>   Ubuntu on an SD card, booting, installing required additional packages,
>   downloading your source code to the card, building and then installing,
you
>   just do 'bitbake my-image' and everything you need is encoded in recipe
files
>   which you can keep under version control. There's less chance for human
error
>   to creep in.
>
> - You don't need to install the toolchain on the board itself, you can do
the
You can even create your own toolchain with all needed headers. And it is
damn easy to remote debug your application from eclipse for example.
>   system build on a separate machine and not pollute the SD card image
with the
>   history of building your software. It saves you the time of going
through and
>   removing the things you need to build your software but aren't needed
to run
>   it, which you'll probably end up doing to reduce the image size.
>
> - You'll have a great community of people doing similar things with the
Yocto
+1
>   Project. I don't know of a similar community for modifying Ubuntu SD
card
>   images in this fashion.
>
And you can fine tune all those recipe and build for example a hard float
or a softfloat image.

It is a little bit hard to get started but if you get familiar with this.
There is no alternative :)

--
Christian Ege
> Hope this helps,
>
> --
> Paul Barker
>
> Email: paul@paulbarker.me.uk
> http://www.paulbarker.me.uk
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3987 bytes --]

Re: Why use Yocto?

[Bob Cochran]

On 06/10/2014 07:25 AM, Christian Ege wrote:
>
> Am 10.06.2014 12:38 schrieb "Paul Barker" <paul@paulbarker.me.uk
> <mailto:paul@paulbarker.me.uk>>:
>  >
>  > On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:52:50PM -0700, Marlon Smith wrote:
>  > > Hi everyone,
>  > >
>  > > I'm developing a product that will run on a custom i.MX6 board and I'm
>  > > trying to decide whether to use Yocto or Ubuntu (there's a version of
>  > > Ubuntu packaged for the Wandboard that will run on our board).  The
>  > > board will run our own custom app, and we'll modify the Linux kernel to
>  > > support our hardware.
>  > >
>  > > Ubuntu seems like it would be ready to go - just put it on an SD card,
>  > > boot the board, compile the app and create a new SD card image from the
>  > > result to use for manufacturing.


How dp you plan to sell/market/license your Ubuntu based machine?

Would you become an Ubuntu hardware partner? 
http://www.ubuntu.com/partners/find-a-partner/hardware

The scope of this partnership seems to be servers and desktops.  I 
assume they also have something in the works for smart phone partners.

However, I'm guessing you're building something that doesn't fit these 
categories.

I remember seeing various demo images over the years of Ubuntu running 
on embedded hardware, but it always seems to fizzle out.  EmbeddedUbuntu 
on the Ubuntu Wiki was last updated in 2009.

But maybe you're talking with people at Canonical and they are telling 
you something different? If so, please share.  	

Phillip brought up licensing issues, and I'm wondering whether you can 
roll an "Ubuntu Linux" box without Canonical being on board.


>  > >
>  > > Yocto seems like it would be easier to remove unneeded packages from,
>  > > and easier to cross-compile the application for.  This means we could
>  > > have a smaller SD card image in the end.
>  > >
>  > > What are your thoughts on this?
>  >
>  > Philip has already mentioned license compliance in his reply, I'd
> like to add a
>  > couple of other points:
>  >
>  > - In addition to a smaller image, you should have less services
> running by
>  >   default and so lower power usage.
>  >
> This is because yocto splits documentation and not needed stuff in
> separate packages. In ubuntu you have to remove a lot of stuff.
>  > - It's much easier to do consistent, reproducible image builds which
> include
> This us a major feature. You can build the whole image by Jenkins or any
> other build server.
>  >   your own packages. Rather than having a series of steps such as
> installing
>  >   Ubuntu on an SD card, booting, installing required additional packages,
>  >   downloading your source code to the card, building and then
> installing, you
>  >   just do 'bitbake my-image' and everything you need is encoded in
> recipe files
>  >   which you can keep under version control. There's less chance for
> human error
>  >   to creep in.
>  >
>  > - You don't need to install the toolchain on the board itself, you
> can do the
> You can even create your own toolchain with all needed headers. And it
> is damn easy to remote debug your application from eclipse for example.
>  >   system build on a separate machine and not pollute the SD card
> image with the
>  >   history of building your software. It saves you the time of going
> through and
>  >   removing the things you need to build your software but aren't
> needed to run
>  >   it, which you'll probably end up doing to reduce the image size.
>  >
>  > - You'll have a great community of people doing similar things with
> the Yocto
> +1
>  >   Project. I don't know of a similar community for modifying Ubuntu
> SD card
>  >   images in this fashion.
>  >
> And you can fine tune all those recipe and build for example a hard
> float or a softfloat image.
>
> It is a little bit hard to get started but if you get familiar with
> this. There is no alternative :)
>
> --
> Christian Ege
>  > Hope this helps,
>  >
>  > --
>  > Paul Barker
>  >
>  > Email: paul@paulbarker.me.uk <mailto:paul@paulbarker.me.uk>
>  > http://www.paulbarker.me.uk
>  >
>  > --
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > yocto mailing list
>  > yocto@yoctoproject.org <mailto:yocto@yoctoproject.org>
>  > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>  >
>
>
>

Re: Why use Yocto?

[Maxim Radugin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1481 bytes --]

Hi Marlon,

Some more points to vote for yocto:
1) ability to switch to another board easily (even with different arch)
just by switching the BSP layer and optionally doing some kernel and
bootloader config;
2) you can switch between package versions you want to use, plus fine-tune
and patch them for your specific needs;

As the downside of Yocto I can mention that "baking" process is quite time
and resource intensive.

BR,
Maxim.

On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Marlon Smith <marlon.smith10@gmail.com>
wrote:

>  Hi everyone,
>
> I'm developing a product that will run on a custom i.MX6 board and I'm
> trying to decide whether to use Yocto or Ubuntu (there's a version of
> Ubuntu packaged for the Wandboard that will run on our board).  The board
> will run our own custom app, and we'll modify the Linux kernel to support
> our hardware.
>
> Ubuntu seems like it would be ready to go - just put it on an SD card,
> boot the board, compile the app and create a new SD card image from the
> result to use for manufacturing.
>
> Yocto seems like it would be easier to remove unneeded packages from, and
> easier to cross-compile the application for.  This means we could have a
> smaller SD card image in the end.
>
> What are your thoughts on this?
>
> Thanks
>
> Marlon
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2175 bytes --]

Re: Why use Yocto?

[Nicolas Dechesne]

On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Bob Cochran <yocto@mindchasers.com> wrote:
>
> How dp you plan to sell/market/license your Ubuntu based machine?
>
> Would you become an Ubuntu hardware partner?
> http://www.ubuntu.com/partners/find-a-partner/hardware
>
> The scope of this partnership seems to be servers and desktops.  I assume
> they also have something in the works for smart phone partners.
>
> However, I'm guessing you're building something that doesn't fit these
> categories.
>
> I remember seeing various demo images over the years of Ubuntu running on
> embedded hardware, but it always seems to fizzle out.  EmbeddedUbuntu on the
> Ubuntu Wiki was last updated in 2009.
>
> But maybe you're talking with people at Canonical and they are telling you
> something different? If so, please share.

i guess this is of interest for the discussion (from [1]):

===
2. Your use of Ubuntu

You can download, install and receive updates to Ubuntu for free.
Ubuntu is freely available to all users for personal, or in the case
of organisations, internal use. It is provided for this use without
warranty. All implied warranties are disclaimed to the fullest extent
permitted at law.

You can modify Ubuntu for personal or internal use.
You can make changes to Ubuntu for your own personal use or for your
organisation’s own internal use.

You can redistribute Ubuntu, but only where there has been no
modification to it.
You can redistribute Ubuntu in its unmodified form, complete with the
installer images and packages provided by Canonical (this includes the
publication or launch of virtual machine images).

Any redistribution of modified versions of Ubuntu must be approved,
certified or provided by Canonical if you are going to associate it
with the Trademarks. Otherwise you must remove and replace the
Trademarks and will need to recompile the source code to create your
own binaries. This does not affect your rights under any open source
licence applicable to any of the components of Ubuntu. If you need us
to approve, certify or provide modified versions for redistribution
you will require a licence agreement from Canonical, for which you may
be required to pay. For further information, please contact us (as set
out below).
===

IANAL... but i guess the last paragraph clarifies what you can do (or not).

[1] http://www.canonical.com/intellectual-property-rights-policy

Re: Why use Yocto?

[Marlon Smith]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2863 bytes --]

Wow, thanks everyone for the excellent replies.  I am a developer and
not much of a legal guy, so pointing out the licensing issues with
Ubuntu was especially helpful.

It sounds like we are going to choose Yocto for our product.

On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 17:42 +0200, Nicolas Dechesne wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Bob Cochran <yocto@mindchasers.com> wrote:
> >
> > How dp you plan to sell/market/license your Ubuntu based machine?
> >
> > Would you become an Ubuntu hardware partner?
> > http://www.ubuntu.com/partners/find-a-partner/hardware
> >
> > The scope of this partnership seems to be servers and desktops.  I assume
> > they also have something in the works for smart phone partners.
> >
> > However, I'm guessing you're building something that doesn't fit these
> > categories.
> >
> > I remember seeing various demo images over the years of Ubuntu running on
> > embedded hardware, but it always seems to fizzle out.  EmbeddedUbuntu on the
> > Ubuntu Wiki was last updated in 2009.
> >
> > But maybe you're talking with people at Canonical and they are telling you
> > something different? If so, please share.
> 
> i guess this is of interest for the discussion (from [1]):
> 
> ===
> 2. Your use of Ubuntu
> 
> You can download, install and receive updates to Ubuntu for free.
> Ubuntu is freely available to all users for personal, or in the case
> of organisations, internal use. It is provided for this use without
> warranty. All implied warranties are disclaimed to the fullest extent
> permitted at law.
> 
> You can modify Ubuntu for personal or internal use.
> You can make changes to Ubuntu for your own personal use or for your
> organisation’s own internal use.
> 
> You can redistribute Ubuntu, but only where there has been no
> modification to it.
> You can redistribute Ubuntu in its unmodified form, complete with the
> installer images and packages provided by Canonical (this includes the
> publication or launch of virtual machine images).
> 
> Any redistribution of modified versions of Ubuntu must be approved,
> certified or provided by Canonical if you are going to associate it
> with the Trademarks. Otherwise you must remove and replace the
> Trademarks and will need to recompile the source code to create your
> own binaries. This does not affect your rights under any open source
> licence applicable to any of the components of Ubuntu. If you need us
> to approve, certify or provide modified versions for redistribution
> you will require a licence agreement from Canonical, for which you may
> be required to pay. For further information, please contact us (as set
> out below).
> ===
> 
> IANAL... but i guess the last paragraph clarifies what you can do (or not).
> 
> [1] http://www.canonical.com/intellectual-property-rights-policy



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3834 bytes --]

Re: Why use Yocto?

[Alex J Lennon]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 802 bytes --]


On 10/06/2014 17:50, Marlon Smith wrote:
> Wow, thanks everyone for the excellent replies.  I am a developer and
> not much of a legal guy, so pointing out the licensing issues with
> Ubuntu was especially helpful.
>
> It sounds like we are going to choose Yocto for our product.

Further to the excellent points made by others, presumably Freescale are
providing commercial support on Yocto for i.MX6 now too.

I know they have a developer day coming up in the UK shortly at which
Yocto is on the agenda.

I also suspect they will have some "ready to run" binaries somewhere for
download, although I can't spot them in the walled garden.

They usually do, and that might even be enough for you, depending on
your needs, and how custom the board variant is...

Regards,

Alex


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1447 bytes --]

Re: Why use Yocto?

[Insop Song]

Just add my few cents of using Yocto.

Since yocto is tailored towards embedded system, normally it includes
light weight (strip-down version/flavor) software and servers, such as
sysklogd instead of syslogd and busybox cron instead of crond.

Which is not a bad thing at all, as this make sure your system is less bloated.

However, just be aware that when you want to make some changes to
these server configurations, you need more debugging time since some
of this strip-down servers does not behave as other full blown
servers. Also this means that google search wont' give you good
answers either since most of the answers to the existing distribution
(ubuntu, debian,,,) targeted.

On the other hand, this mailing list is very active, and you will get
answers from other developers quickly.

ISS


On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Alex J Lennon
<ajlennon@dynamicdevices.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On 10/06/2014 17:50, Marlon Smith wrote:
>
> Wow, thanks everyone for the excellent replies.  I am a developer and not
> much of a legal guy, so pointing out the licensing issues with Ubuntu was
> especially helpful.
>
> It sounds like we are going to choose Yocto for our product.
>
>
> Further to the excellent points made by others, presumably Freescale are
> providing commercial support on Yocto for i.MX6 now too.
>
> I know they have a developer day coming up in the UK shortly at which Yocto
> is on the agenda.
>
> I also suspect they will have some "ready to run" binaries somewhere for
> download, although I can't spot them in the walled garden.
>
> They usually do, and that might even be enough for you, depending on your
> needs, and how custom the board variant is...
>
> Regards,
>
> Alex
>
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>