SDK container switch to debian:bookworm

Technical Support
, ,
1

I am trying to port a CMake based application to torizon.
In order to use the newest packages I wanted to switch to using debian:bookworm as the base container for the SDK. Is there a setting that I can change to switch between bullseye and bookworm?

Thanks,
Direttore

2

Greetings @direttore,

I’ll need to ask some questions to get more information.

I assume you’re using our Torizon IDE extensions to develop your application correct? Are you using the V1 or V2 extensions? If you’re using V2 then projects created there should default to Debian bookworm already.

Also what version of TorizonCore are you using? Our bullseye containers were designed wtih TorizonCore 5 in mind and our bookworm containers were designed for TorizonCore 6. You might be able to mix and match these, but you may run into peculiarities and possible issues.

Best Regards,
Jeremias

3

Hi Jeremias,

You are right, I am using the Torizon IDE extension V2. If I create a new single container project it defaults to bookworm. However if I try to import an existing CMake project it gives me four options, all of which are based on bullseye. Any idea how to fix this?

As for Torizon Core version I will update it to 6 if the first step succeeds.

Thanks,
Direttore

4

However if I try to import an existing CMake project it gives me four options, all of which are based on bullseye. Any idea how to fix this?

Was this existing CMake project created with the V1 extension, or was it just some other CMake project you already had?

Also how exactly are you “importing” this project into the V2 extension? I don’t believe the V2 extension has an import feature yet, and also I just checked it also doesn’t have a CMake template either. Are you sure this is with our V2 extension?

Best Regards,
Jeremias

5

This is a CMake project that I already had.
You were right, V2 doesn’t have the import option at all. I was actually using the Toradex Torizon Support (Early Access) v1.6.6 extension and then I chose the option Torizon/C-C++: Import existing C/C++ application.
That is probably the reason why I am still getting the bullseye base image.
Is there a way to manually switch to bookworm?

Regards,
Direttore

6

I was actually using the Toradex Torizon Support (Early Access) v1.6.6 extension

Ahh okay that makes sense then. Well in that case then you’ll have some difficulties. The V1 extensions aren’t very flexible, hence the re-design we did for V2. In any case changing the V1 templates to use bookworm is not really possible. Furthermore, as I mentioned previously the V2 extensions don’t have a CMake template yet, though we do plan to create a CMake template it’s still not been done yet.

So here’s your options then, you could wait till we port/create the CMake template to the V2 extensions in which case using bookworm would be trivial.

You could also develop manually outside of the IDE, in which case you’d have full control of things, but then obviously you wouldn’t have the aide of the IDE.

Alternatively, you could even make/contribute a rudimentary template for the V2 extensions that support CMake. We’ve had other customers contribute their own templates as well. Some details on this here: https://github.com/toradex/vscode-torizon-templates/blob/bookworm/CONTRIBUTING.md

Now all that said the reason you want to use bookworm is because:

In order to use the newest packages I wanted to switch to using debian:bookworm as the base container for the SDK.

Is this vital for your project or more of a quality of life improvement?

Best Regards,
Jeremias

7

Thank you for the explanation. I’ll see what I can do regarding the CMake template.
As to why I am trying to switch to bookworm, the reason is that I need the newer versions of protobuf and grpc packages than bullseye has to offer, everything else should be fine. Tried to change this manually at some point earlier, but that didn’t work.

Thanks,
Direttore

8

Just to inform you, I’ve brought up your case here with our IDE extensions team. They agree that the need for a CMake templte in our V2 extensions comes up somewhat frequently. Hopefully this will help speed up the prioritization of this template from our team. Though I still don’t have a strict timeline to provide you.

Best Regards,
Jeremias