I have all compiled binaries for target machine. I want to create a binary package - say .ipk, .rpm - for target machine. As this suggested to clone poky, which will have bitbake within it. But, as this document says, we can directly use bitbake without poky, however, it not mentioned anywhere that we need poky as well as bitbake to build a custom package. But of course poky is required if we have to compile source code and create binaries.
If I don't need to compile any source code at all, does I need to have Poky?
Is it possible to build a package with only bitbake?
First, Poky is a reference distribution that contains primarily bitbake and openembedded-core.
Yes, you need oe-core to build packages as the logic to build packages is part of oe-core, not bitbake.
Related
I'm new to c development, but I have some experience in other modern languages .so the first thing that I found hard is dependencies and deployment, while we got Gradle, maven, NuGet and pipy and... but in c I find it a bit difficult to manage this process.
for example, I have an app that should use mongo-c-library, log4c,libarchive so basically, in my development environment, I download and unzip all of the tar files of the above libraries and then followed their instruction(usually some make stuff) and installed them in order to include them in code make the code work.
I have studied a bit about CMake but I couldn't get a clear picture of how that could actually solve the problem.
at this moment my best solution is to create an install bash script and zip all dependencies unzipped folder with that install script and then send it to the production server to deploy it.
1.The first question is : is it possible to just copy and past all of .so .h and etc files in /path/of/installed/dependencies/include
and /path/of/installed/dependencies/lib in the destination server libary path.
2.if not what is the faster way?
while I was surfing the CMake source file I found that its developers just use this package source code directly.
cmxxx contains the xxx sources and headers files.
3.how can apt-get and Linux package manager help in the deployment process?
2 first question was more about dependencies. imagine we have a simple c app and we want to install(build and make a useable executable file) quickly. how it can be related to .deb packages.
1.The first question is : is it possible to just copy and past all of .so .h and etc files in /path/of/installed/dependencies/include and /path/of/installed/dependencies/lib in the destination server libary path.
Yes, technically it's possible. That's essentially what package managers do under the hood. However, doing that is a colossal mistake and screams bad practices. If that's what you want then in the very least you should look into package managers to build up your own installer, which handles this sort of stuff already for you.
2.if not what is the faster way?
You're actually asking an entirely different question, which is: how should I distribute my code, and how do I expect users to use/deploy it?
If you want users to access your source code and build it locally, as you've mentioned cmake then you just to set up your project right as cmake already supports that usecase.
If instead you just want to distribute binaries for a platform then you'll need to build and package that code. Again, cmake can also help you on that one, as cmake's cpack supports generating some types of packages like DEB packages used by Debian and Ubuntu, and which are handled by apt.
3.how can apt-get and Linux package manager help in the deployment process?
apt is designed to download and install packages from a repository.
Under the hood, apt uses DEB packages, which can be installed with dpkg.
If you're targeting a system that uses apt/deb, you can build DEB packages whenever you release a version to allow people to install their software.
You can also go a step beyond and release your DEB packages in a Personal Package Archive.
You would typically NOT download and install source packages. Instead you should generally rely on the libraries and development packages of the distribution. When building your own package you would typically just reference the packages or files that your package is dependent on. Then you build your own package and you're done. Upon installation of your package, all dependencies will automatically be resolved in an appropriate order.
What exactly needs to be done is dependent on the package management system, but generally the above statements apply. Be advised, package management apparently is pretty hard, because so many 3rd party developers screw it up.
I have to create SOAP services in C using axis2C. But since axis2C is kind of not maintained properly as per this question, I have to use axis2C unofficial source code. But I could not see configure file to build the sources. How should I build this. I checked all the documentation both in here and in the github repo but no luck. All points to the axis2C official documentation. Should I copy the sources from unofficial to official code and try with the configure script in official folder ?
This project probably uses the GNU build system. In this system, ./configure is a portable shell script that is automatically generated from hand-written input files, the main file is configure.ac.
So, distribution packages of the source will contain ./configure, therefore enabling anyone on any platform with a sh-compatible shell and a make utility to build the software. But as it is a generated file, you will not find it in source-code repositories, e.g. on github.
To build a package using the GNU build system directly from source controls, you have to use the GNU autotools yourself to generate ./configure. In order to do this, install the following packages:
autoconf -- generates ./configure from ./configure.ac.
automake -- generates portable makefile templates Makefile.in from Makefile.am (those templates are then filled with values by the ./configure script to write the final Makefiles)
libtool -- tools for building dynamic shared objects on different platforms
Then, the command autoreconf -i given in the root of your source package should generate the ./configure script for you.
Note that there are packages providing a script ./autogen.sh (or similarly named). If this is there, you should call it instead of running autoreconf -i yourself, it might contain additional necessary preparation steps. ./autogen.sh will typically directly run the generated ./configure for you.
I am using the cmake to build my project. However, I need to build this project on a machine that I do not have the permission to install any software on it. I thought I can use the generated makefile but it has the dependencies on CMake,and says cmake:command not found.Is there any solution that force the generated makefile do not have any cmake related command such as check the system version? Thanks
Is there any solution that force the generated makefile do not have any cmake related command such as check the system version?
No. There is no incentive for cmake to provide such an option, because the whole point of the cmake system is that the cmake program examines the build machine and uses what it finds to generate a Makefile (if you're using that generator) appropriate to the machine. The generated Makefiles are tailored to the machine, and it is not assumed that they would be suitable for any other machine, so there is no reason to suppose that one would need to use one on a machine that does not have cmake. In fact, if you look at the generated Makefiles you'll find all sorts of dependencies on cmake.
Depending on the breadth of your target machine types, you might consider the Autotools instead. Some people dislike them, and they're not a good choice if you want to support Microsoft's toolchain on Windows, but they do have the advantage that an Autotools-based build system can be used to build software on machines that do not themselves have the Autotools installed.
one easy solution is to use static libraries and the 'static' parameter in the command line.
Then you should be able to drop the executable on the target machine and run it.
I am trying to build jansson C library using premake.
The designers of the library require us to:
./configure
make
make install
the above steps generates jansson_config.h that is needed for the build.
What I want to do is:
./configure
premake4 gmake
make
What happens when I do that is that the build fails saying that jansson_config.h is missing.
How would I be able to achieve what I want?
Building with other build systems than those directly supported by Jansson is documented here: https://jansson.readthedocs.org/en/2.7/gettingstarted.html#other-systems
Basically, you just take src/jansson_config.h.in, copy it to src/jansson_config.h and edit it, replacing all #var# placeholders to match your target system.
I'd like to use setcap, part of libcap-bin, on an embedded Linux device. I use buildroot and see that it has the packages libcap and libcap-ng available, but not libcap-bin.
I googled around but cannot find the source for libcap-bin to produce the setcap binary for the ARM target board.
On Ubuntu I just install with:
sudo apt-get install libcap-bin
Where can I get the source and how can I build libcap-bin for my ARM board?
As others have explained: you can't expect a 1:1 match between the packages you're seeing in your Ubuntu/Debian distribution and the packages you're seeing in Buildroot.
Ubuntu/Debian packages take source packages (in this case libcap) and create multiple binary packages from them, in order to allow you to install only the library, or the library + development files, or the library + programs, etc. For example, look at http://packages.ubuntu.com/source/quantal/libcap2, which is the reference page for the libcap2 source package: it gives you the list of binary packages generated in Ubuntu from this source package.
On the other hand, in Buildroot, there is only the concept of source packages. One package in Buildroot == one tarball from a given software component. Therefore, there is only package/libcap. At the moment, package/libcap/libcap.mk is written to only install the library because no-one needed the setcap and getcap programs. But you can extend package/libcap/libcap.mk (and possibly package/libcap/Config.in) to enable the compilation of the programs as well. As another commenter noted, you will need to add attr as a dependency (though the commenter wrongly said that Buildroot didn't had attr: it does have it, see package/attr).