Skip to content

Everest/ccc: Revision of development chapter #53

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: everest/charge_control_c
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

FaHaGit
Copy link
Contributor

@FaHaGit FaHaGit commented May 22, 2025

Revision of the cross-compile chapter

FaHaGit added 2 commits May 22, 2025 08:24
Signed-off-by: Fabian Hartung <fabian.hartung@chargebyte.com>
Signed-off-by: Fabian Hartung <fabian.hartung@chargebyte.com>
@FaHaGit FaHaGit requested review from lategoodbye and barsnick May 22, 2025 06:31
@FaHaGit
Copy link
Contributor Author

FaHaGit commented May 22, 2025

I would adjust chargesom as soon as we are through with the review here

Copy link
Contributor

@barsnick barsnick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Much nicer than before.

Some small issues noted.


.. literalinclude:: ../../includes/_static/files/toolchain.cmake

#. Create a new :code:`build` directory in "my-module" and navigate to it.
#. Create a new :code:`build_tarragon` directory in the EVerest project directory (e.g. inside :code:`everest-core`):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I believe this should still reference the module directory, in case the user is developing in their own dir.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would like to show both opportunities (cross-compile own module directory and everest-core).. I try to improve it.


.. code-block:: console

cmake -DCMAKE_TOOLCHAIN_FILE=../toolchain/toolchain.cmake -DCMAKE_SYSROOT=/mnt/rootfs ..
cmake -DCMAKE_TOOLCHAIN_FILE=../../toolchain/toolchain.cmake -DCMAKE_SYSROOT=/mnt/rootfs ..
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you sure you need ../.. now?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@FaHaGit FaHaGit Jun 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

now the toolchain file is located in "/everest-workspace" before it was in the module directory of the customer EVerest project ("/everest_workspace/my_module/"). I think it is correct.


#. When this ends successfully, start cross-compiling using :code:`make`:
#. When this completes successfully, start cross-compiling using :code:`make`:

.. code-block:: console

make install -j$(nproc)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Perhaps note that this will first compile, and then install under dist/, if successful.


.. code-block:: console

cmake -DCMAKE_TOOLCHAIN_FILE=../toolchain/toolchain.cmake -DCMAKE_SYSROOT=/mnt/rootfs ..
cmake -DCMAKE_TOOLCHAIN_FILE=../../toolchain/toolchain.cmake -DCMAKE_SYSROOT=/mnt/rootfs ..
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

At this point, I hope that the user sticks to the common EVerest directory structure (with modules/MyModule/, interfaces/, types/). Is that noted somewhere in the prerequisites for development?

Rework after review

Signed-off-by: Fabian Hartung <fabian.hartung@chargebyte.com>
@FaHaGit FaHaGit requested a review from barsnick June 18, 2025 12:37
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants