Re: [beagleboard] Yocto

Xianghua Xiao <xiaoxianghua@...>

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Bruce Ashfield
<> wrote:
On 10-12-03 02:11 PM, Xianghua Xiao wrote:

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Petr Štetiar<>  wrote:

Michael J. Hammel<>  [2010-12-03 11:01:27]:


I've heard of Yocto only in passing.  I'm assuming it's another
bitbake-based metabuild system?  Is there some reasoning why
Meego/Linaro/OpenEmbedded/Angstrom/Custom Builds cannot fill the
requirements of Yocto?  I don't mean that harshly at all - I'm just
curious about the evolution and true target audiences of these projects.
It's nice to have choices, but developers should have some idea of the
differences so they can choose wisely when just starting.
Richard wrote nice summary[1], it's worth reading and it might answer
questions as well :-)


-- ynezz

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Beagle Board" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at

May we know roughly how many paid resources are behind Yocto?

Which arch will be first officially supported? Will it be ATOM as Poky
is really part of Intel? Beagle/ARM will be done by the community
I can provide some answers for this part of the query.

In the 0.9 release, we already support the following arches:

 - x86(64), mips, arm and powerpc

These are all based on a 2.6.34 kernel base (with an option
for 2.6.37-rcX shortly). There are simulated targets for
each arch, and a hardware reference for each as well
(for ARM the reference hardware is the beagleboard).

Hope that helps,


yocto mailing list
Will try it on my beagle.
I failed to find info on other hardware reference platform. And I
found 0.9 has an ATOM download as

Additionally, is not working.


Join to automatically receive all group messages.