[Development] QtCS: Qt Embedded

Girish Ramakrishnan girish at forwardbias.in
Thu Jul 5 07:33:55 CEST 2012


Hi Laszlo,

On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Laszlo Papp <lpapp at kde.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 6:45 AM, Girish Ramakrishnan
> <girish at forwardbias.in> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> For those who were unable to attend, I have posted notes on
>> http://qt-project.org/groups/qt-contributors-summit-2012/wiki/Qt-in-Embedded.
>
> Great! I have few comments from my side:
>
> 1) Please do not forget the QtSerialPort project we have been working
> on. I see no mentionings about that.
>

There was no representative from the serial port project in the discussion :)

> I think serial port management is a crucial part of many existing
> embedded boards and systems (just mentioning rpi via gadget serial
> driver, beagleboard, pandaboard and so forth). Therefore, this should
> also be a fundamental part of the vision. Luckily enough, we have a
> good team around focusing on that, and can propose to a mature add-on
> soon from playground.
>

Indeed. I think out-of-the-box working serial port management would be
awesome. We should have pre-configured serial port settings for each
device.

> 2) Pandaboard (including the ES version) is not mentioned, but it has
> been working fine for me as well. Our company has been using that
> daily for business goals, so I would definitely put that there as
> supported. I am sure, it is not just us. I would even say, it is
> probably more appealing recently than the beagleboard.
>

Supported == whatever we have managed to get around working in
mkspecs/devices. I actually have pandaboard spec here -
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,25365. I just haven't gotten
around to polishing it.

> 3) I find the onboard build important as well. Perhaps I can focus
> more on that, if you do not find this ability that important as the
> cross-build. This is pretty much the common way for ready-made OSes I
> worked with, like ubuntu-arm, arch-arm and so forth. It fits better to
> many people's workflow including me.
>

Yes, we could use with help here. Currently, we (as in Donald,
Johannes and myself) have been only focusing on xcompilation support
and not on-board compilation support. -device currently assumes
xcompilation. It would be great to have it also support on-host
compilation out of the box.

Thanks,
Girish



More information about the Development mailing list