Thanks for all the help so far, I have a working recipe which installs the whole
toolchain to /usr/bin and uses that from another recipe :)
> On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 08:55 +, Richard Purdie wrote:
> You can probably do that by extending SYSROOT_DIRS in the recipe.
I'm still having issues here:
> On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 04:01 +, Richard Purdie wrote:
> If its a native recipe, there are no packages and therefore FILES
> doesn't make sense.
Oh, I have to admit I'm pretty new to the concept of the native packages.
Where can I find the list of files that are considered to be installed into
> On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 04:01 +, Richard Purdie wrote:
> If its a native recipe, there are no packages and therefore FILES
> doesn't make sense.
Oh, I have to admit I'm pretty new to the concept of the native packages.
Where can I find the list of files that are considered to be installed into
>On Wed, 2019-10-23 at 15:34 +, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>On Wed, 2019-10-23 at 11:23 +, Westermann, Oliver wrote:
>> Hey,
>> [...]
>> Any suggestions on what I'm doing wrong or how to debug this further?
>Sounds like the sysroot filtering code doe
Hey,
I'm having issues adding a build for a bare metal target to my yocto toolchain.
I've a NXP SoC with a M4 core and I would like to integrate the M4 binary build
into yocto.
My M4 binary has a CMAKE file that depends on ARMGCC_DIR being set to locate
the toolchain and everything works fine l
Hey,
I'm trying to implement a bootloader-signing mechanism within yocto for
extended secure-boot support. The bootloader and it's recipes are provided by
NXP (in this case it's the imx-boot_*.bb recipe from meta-freescale) and I want
to use a secondary recipe which I am creating to sign the re
Hey,
I'm currently in the process of updating our yocto (sumo) with a new kernel
version from a supplier (NXP) and I'm having some issues, we somehow broke
deployment of the linux kernel: I get the Image & symlink in my images folder,
but it does not end up in my rootfs. It SHOULD end up at /bo
> > is that what you were after?
> override is the first thing that crossed my mind...
Thanks both of you, an additional machine override was exactly what we needed.
Best regards, Olli
--
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.y
Hey,
We've a product group with different devices, each having their machine-conf, eg
Device_a
Device_a_mini
Device_b
Device_b_mini <- Upcoming
Device_c <- Upcoming
Since device_a and device_a_mini share a lot of code, for them we use one of
the machine overrides, describing the processor family
