bitbake-setup Compatible

[angolini]

I've been trying to play around with bitbake-setup and created a very simple, rough draft for what would be a registry for FSLC.

https://github.com/angolini/fsl-community-bsp-setup

There are a list of things that can be improved. Included all the names and lists. But my TODO list is:

• better deal with setup-env (by default we prompt the user to read EULA)
• include the list of machines available on meta-freescale-3rdparty
• make the same for scarthgap and whinlatter

We can also discuss how to setup the distros as fragments/configurations as well.

[otavio]

I saw this issue and wanted to flag it—it aligns with what we discussed at the end of last week.

My take: In theory, the setup-env script doesn't make much sense if we adopt the big setup script approach. The interactive setup configures all the machines as needed, so a separate environment script is redundant.

Regarding the EULA license agreement that setup-env currently handles: this could be done using a fragment instead. That way, the user would need to explicitly accept it as part of the configuration process, rather than through a separate script prompt. It's cleaner and keeps everything within the same workflow.

What do you think?

[otavio]

The distributions could be reduced. We could use FSLC and FSL as base distributions, and X Wayland and Wayland as configuration fragments that the user could choose. This simplifies the distro matrix and gives users flexibility without maintaining multiple complete distro definitions.

[angolini]

I will prepare a set of fragments, we can discuss where to copy them and which other we want

Regarding the EULA license agreement that setup-env currently handles: this could be done using a fragment instead. That way, the user would need to explicitly accept it as part of the configuration process, rather than through a separate script prompt. It's cleaner and keeps everything within the same workflow.
What do you think?

I think it's a great idea. I will prepare that as well

[angolini]

I suggested a set of fragments: #2425

I also suggest a different way to set the conf.json:

https://github.com/angolini/fsl-community-bsp-setup/blob/fragsss/angolini-fsl-community-bsp.conf.json#L169-L196

[angolini]

I updated #2425 with what I think today that is a good starting point. For the future, what I think would be good:

• prepare the same for whinlatter/wrynose
• have a "full" and a "featured" BitBake Configuration Template, one with the huge list of machines, other with few most used machines only
• bring the distros from meta-freescale-distro to meta-freescale
• create something for meta-3rdparty

[angolini]

@otavio , what do you think should be the next steps on this work?

let's talk about this sometime

[otavio]

I'd like feedback from other community members so we can start discussing and mapping the limitations, then solve them afterwards. We can have a call about that during this week, if you have time.