Sugar on the BeagleBoard using the OpenEmbedded toolkit.

[David Farning]

Welcome to the Sugar on the BeagleBoard project. It seems that we have
all of the pieces in place to do a port.

First, some background.

The initial port will be getting Sugar[1] to run on the Beagleboard[2]
using the Open Embedded[3] toolkit.

For a collaboration point, Jason has set up the sugar on beagle wiki[4].

For Sugar related bug, Sugar Labs uses the OLPC trac[5]. Open Embedded
uses bugzilla[6].

If you are interested come introduce yourself on the beagleboard[7]
mailing list.

thanks
dfarning

1. http://sugarlabs.org/go/Main_Page
2. http://beagleboard.org/
3. http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Main_Page

4. http://elinux.org/BeagleBoardSugar

5. http://dev.laptop.org/wiki
6. http://bugs.openembedded.net/

7. http://groups.google.com/group/beagleboard?hl=en

[Bernie Innocenti]

David Farning wrote:
> Welcome to the Sugar on the BeagleBoard project. It seems that we have
> all of the pieces in place to do a port.

I'd be glad to help after I'm settled back in Europe, which will be
around Sep 8th.

--
\___/ Bernie Innocenti - http://www.codewiz.org/
_| X | Sugar Labs Team - http://www.sugarlabs.org/
\|_O_| "It's an education project, not a laptop project!"

[Koen Kooi]

Op 22 aug 2008, om 02:29 heeft David Farning het volgende geschreven:

> Welcome to the Sugar on the BeagleBoard project. It seems that we
> have
> all of the pieces in place to do a port.
>
> First, some background.
>
> The initial port will be getting Sugar[1] to run on the Beagleboard[2]
> using the Open Embedded[3] toolkit.

The basics (sugar, sugar-base, sugar-toolkit, sugar-presence-services
and sugar-artwork) are now running on the beagleboard:

http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/sugar-running-ångström

To build it using OE: 'bitbake sugar'
To install it in angstrom*: 'opkg install sugar'

The Glucose pack is missing sugar-datastore (needs a lot of python
modules that aren't in OE yet), etoys (haven't looked at that yet) and
journal (haven't looked at that either).
The Fructose pack is completely missing in OE.

The remaining tasks for people wanting to work on this are:

1) add OE recipes for needed python-modules
2) add OE recipes for remaining Glucose items
3) add OE recipes for Fructose items
4) build it
5) install resulting packages and run them, see them crash due to
missing python modules, goto 1
6) make screenshots :)

regards,

Koen

* only has armv7a packages at the moment

[Edward Cherlin]

On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 3:57 AM, Koen Kooi <k.k...@student.utwente.nl> wrote:
>
> Op 22 aug 2008, om 02:29 heeft David Farning het volgende geschreven:
>
>> Welcome to the Sugar on the BeagleBoard project. It seems that we have
>> all of the pieces in place to do a port.

Very good. Thank you.

I see that BeagleBoards list at $149. Do you have any idea of quantity
pricing? Apparently TI sells them only through Digikey, which only
gives single-unit prices on its site. I can see applications for data
acquisition and control worldwide, as well as for teaching embedded
systems development. I am thinking of possibilities for placement of
systems through microfinance, assuming that we can find and document
ways to increase income using BeagleBoard+Sugar more efficiently than
by other methods.

I assume that OE is intended to be all Free Software, and I see
scattered references to GPL 2 in the Wiki, but I don't see a clear
statement on licensing on the main page or in the FAQ. Can somebody
write one? Also, one or more architecture pages showing the toolchain,
relationships with other Free Software projects, and the structure of
the resulting builds?

>> First, some background.
>>
>> The initial port will be getting Sugar[1] to run on the Beagleboard[2]
>> using the Open Embedded[3] toolkit.
>
> The basics (sugar, sugar-base, sugar-toolkit, sugar-presence-services and
> sugar-artwork) are now running on the beagleboard:
>
> http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/sugar-running-ångström
>
> To build it using OE: 'bitbake sugar'
> To install it in angstrom*: 'opkg install sugar'
>
> The Glucose pack is missing sugar-datastore (needs a lot of python modules
> that aren't in OE yet), etoys (haven't looked at that yet) and journal
> (haven't looked at that either).
> The Fructose pack is completely missing in OE.
>
> The remaining tasks for people wanting to work on this are:
>
> 1) add OE recipes for needed python-modules
> 2) add OE recipes for remaining Glucose items
> 3) add OE recipes for Fructose items
> 4) build it
> 5) install resulting packages and run them, see them crash due to missing
> python modules, goto 1
> 6) make screenshots :)
>
> regards,
>
> Koen
>
> * only has armv7a packages at the moment

> _______________________________________________
> Sugar mailing list
> Su...@lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
>
>

--
Silent Thunder [ 默雷 / शब्दगर्ज / شبدگر ج ] is my name,
And Children are my nation.
The Six Worlds are my dwelling place,
And Truth my destination.

[Koen Kooi]

Op 3 sep 2008, om 22:14 heeft Edward Cherlin het volgende geschreven:

> On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 3:57 AM, Koen Kooi
> <k.k...@student.utwente.nl> wrote:
>>
>> Op 22 aug 2008, om 02:29 heeft David Farning het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> Welcome to the Sugar on the BeagleBoard project. It seems that we
>>> have
>>> all of the pieces in place to do a port.
>
> Very good. Thank you.

<snip>

> I assume that OE is intended to be all Free Software

OE is 'merely' a buildsystem (something like gentoos portage or GNOMEs
jhbuild) and its metadata is MIT licensed.

> , and I see
> scattered references to GPL 2 in the Wiki, but I don't see a clear
> statement on licensing on the main page or in the FAQ. Can somebody
> write one?

I'm unsure what is needed beyond the COPYING.MIT in topdir of the
repository. The licensing of your buildsystem should have no bearing
on the resulting distribution.

> Also, one or more architecture pages showing the toolchain,
> relationships with other Free Software projects, and the structure of
> the resulting builds?

As a buildsystem OE has relationships with the interpreter used
(bitbake, hosted at berlios) and it's users (angstrom, nslu2-linux,
openmoko, etc).

I suspect you are confusing OE with a distribution (which angstrom
is), it is not a distro, it's a distro builder :) If you aren't
confusing it, please elaborate on what you want to know so we can send
the doc team to fix it.

regards,

Koen

[Kridner, Jason]

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Edward Cherlin wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 3:57 AM, Koen Kooi <k.k...@student.utwente.nl>
> wrote:
> >
> > Op 22 aug 2008, om 02:29 heeft David Farning het volgende
> geschreven:
> >
> >> Welcome to the Sugar on the BeagleBoard project. It seems that we
> have
> >> all of the pieces in place to do a port.
>
> Very good. Thank you.
>
> I see that BeagleBoards list at $149. Do you have any idea of
> quantity
> pricing? Apparently TI sells them only through Digikey, which only
> gives single-unit prices on its site. I can see applications for data
> acquisition and control worldwide, as well as for teaching embedded
> systems development. I am thinking of possibilities for placement of
> systems through microfinance, assuming that we can find and document
> ways to increase income using BeagleBoard+Sugar more efficiently than
> by other methods.

I do not believe that Digi-Key plans any volume pricing for Beagle Boards. The boards themselves are not a TI product, despite a TI developer being responsible for the design. The schematic and layout are all open and anyone can buy the parts and make them. Digi-Key has been very good and has purchased a few thousand boards through a contract manufacturer to provide them to the open source development community and a good price (and we are very happy about that).

Koen has replied to the Angstrom and OE related questions in the other thread so...

<snip>

[David Farning]

On Wed, 2008-09-03 at 13:14 -0700, Edward Cherlin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 3:57 AM, Koen Kooi <k.k...@student.utwente.nl> wrote:
> >
> > Op 22 aug 2008, om 02:29 heeft David Farning het volgende geschreven:
> >
> >> Welcome to the Sugar on the BeagleBoard project. It seems that we have
> >> all of the pieces in place to do a port.
>
> Very good. Thank you.
>
> I see that BeagleBoards list at $149. Do you have any idea of quantity
> pricing? Apparently TI sells them only through Digikey, which only
> gives single-unit prices on its site. I can see applications for data
> acquisition and control worldwide, as well as for teaching embedded
> systems development. I am thinking of possibilities for placement of
> systems through microfinance, assuming that we can find and document
> ways to increase income using BeagleBoard+Sugar more efficiently than
> by other methods.

The BeagleBoard is a development platform for introducing developers to
the OMAP35x family of processors. I don't believe that it was meant for
endusers. The interesting question I my mind is, 'Who will be the first
to leverage the chipset into low cost thin clients or laptops for use
classrooms?'

thanks
dfarning

[Walter Bender]

The folks who have been interested in the OLPC for health may be interested.

-walter

[Rafael Enrique Ortiz Guerrero]

That's truth one could run for example measure on top of sugar (on the beagleboard) and beging to do some bio signal special adaptations in order to make a low-cost health module-analyser.

--
Rafael Enrique Ortiz Guerrero
One Laptop Per Child
raf...@laptop.org

[Edward Cherlin]

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Koen Kooi <k.k...@student.utwente.nl> wrote:
>
> Op 3 sep 2008, om 22:14 heeft Edward Cherlin het volgende geschreven:
>
>> On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 3:57 AM, Koen Kooi <k.k...@student.utwente.nl>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Op 22 aug 2008, om 02:29 heeft David Farning het volgende geschreven:
>>>
>>>> Welcome to the Sugar on the BeagleBoard project. It seems that we have
>>>> all of the pieces in place to do a port.
>>
>> Very good. Thank you.
>
> <snip>
>
>> I assume that OE is intended to be all Free Software
>
> OE is 'merely' a buildsystem (something like gentoos portage or GNOMEs
> jhbuild) and its metadata is MIT licensed.

OK. What are your intentions, if any, for builds made using this
system? Is it simply up to the builer? Have any projects announced
licensing plans?

>> , and I see
>> scattered references to GPL 2 in the Wiki, but I don't see a clear
>> statement on licensing on the main page or in the FAQ. Can somebody
>> write one?
>
> I'm unsure what is needed beyond the COPYING.MIT in topdir of the
> repository. The licensing of your buildsystem should have no bearing on the
> resulting distribution.

Well, that's in the repository, not in the Wiki. How does a newbie
know where to look if you don't have a Wiki page that lays it out?

>> Also, one or more architecture pages showing the toolchain,
>> relationships with other Free Software projects, and the structure of
>> the resulting builds?
>
> As a buildsystem OE has relationships with the interpreter used (bitbake,
> hosted at berlios) and it's users (angstrom, nslu2-linux, openmoko, etc).

Fine. Let's see that. All of it. Don't assume that I or someone else
coming in new knows any of it. If you want to make assumptions about
what new people know, tell us what those assumptions are so that we
can go elsewhere and learn about them.

> I suspect you are confusing OE with a distribution (which angstrom is), it
> is not a distro, it's a distro builder :) If you aren't confusing it, please
> elaborate on what you want to know so we can send the doc team to fix it.

Just have them pretend that these are Frequently Asked Questions,
since I predict that they will be. If my questions assume what is not
stated, that means you have to make a clear statement in order to
prevent others asking the same thing.

> regards,
>
> Koen

Thanks.

>>>> First, some background.
>>>>
>>>> The initial port will be getting Sugar[1] to run on the Beagleboard[2]
>>>> using the Open Embedded[3] toolkit.
>>>

>>> The basics (sugar, sugar-base, sugar-toolkit, sugar-presence-services and