Re: [Arm-netbook] Status update
On 2022-11-21 9:12 a.m., Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 5:07 PM Adam Van Ymeren wrote: Other options are finding a way to raise money to cover the lost cards, you misunderstand: some of the components are *no longer available*. they cannot be manufactured without a complete redesign. Oh right sorry. That being said, building community momentum/interest could result in an interested community member doing the necessary design work. Low probability but it's possible. The 93 missing cards doesn't prevent us from shipping the other cards does it? they have not been manufactured yet. Mike is arranging that. Is this happening in parallel to the current outreach to Chris? ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Status update
On 2022-11-21 8:56 a.m., Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 4:48 PM Adam Van Ymeren wrote: "where are the 93 Cards sent to you in March 2021" There were ~1000+ cards ordered on Crowd Supply. Perhaps we should assume that Chris and those 93 cards are gone and focus on what we can do in their absence? unfortunately there are more backers than there are Cards, and there are not enough components left to replace those missing Cards, and not enough money to *pay* for components, to replace the components necessary to replace those missing Cards. it is absolutely critically essential to fulfilling the promises made that those Cards be tracked down and extracted by any means necessary, from whoever currently possesses them. Other options are finding a way to raise money to cover the lost cards, and/or finding volunteers to forfeit their cards for the success of the project The 93 missing cards doesn't prevent us from shipping the other cards does it? Shipping cards builds momentum and interest. There are (were?) a lot of passionate supporters of this project. People know that crowd funded projects have risk. Shipping 90% of cards late seems like a better result than shipping 0% of cards because 10% of them went missing. If we ship cards and start building momentum again it's possible that we build enough interest to sell more cards at a slight markup which can be used to replace the missing pieces. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Status update
On 2022-11-21 8:43 a.m., Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 4:33 PM Paul Boddie wrote: Sorry, but why do I need to chase him up? The people who need to do that are Crowd Supply, because Chris is also evading answering and failing to respond to the *CEO* of Crowdsupply, Joshua Lifton. the method that is of last resort is now for the *backers* - all of them - to publicly embarrass and shame Chris in providing a direct answer to a direct question: "where are the 93 Cards sent to you in March 2021" There were ~1000+ cards ordered on Crowd Supply. Perhaps we should assume that Chris and those 93 cards are gone and focus on what we can do in their absence? The success of this project, by necessity, cannot rely solely on 93 cards and one person to return from AWOL status. Let's theorize, if Chris were to respond and provide the 93 cards, what is the roadmap for the project from there. What of this roadmap can we complete without Chris and his 93 cars? ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] eoma68 a20 card production
On 21 June 2019 17:13:02 GMT-04:00, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >On Saturday, June 22, 2019, Stefan Monnier >wrote: > >> > When someone works out the darn fex file. >> >> Nowadays, you should just use a mainline linux kernel (with DT) >rather >> than the old Allwinner kernel (with FEX). Of course, that just >shifts >> the problem to "someone works out the darn DT file", but at least >it's >> much better supported > > >> >Full hardware support still is not complete. Also I simply do not have >the >time to redo months of work. > >Any time I spend now basically means I get zero money from NLNet as the >donations from them are based on *milestone* completion, *not* on "time >spent". > >4 weeks on OS rework equals ZERO PAYMENT from NLNet for that entire >time. > > (and there's even an upcoming patch for that >> vanilla kernel which can finally lift the write speed limit on SATA >from >> 50MB/s to 150MB/s or so). > > >Reason why 3.4.104+ has to be shipped was explained 18 or so months >ago. Indeed. We have a working set of software. After shipping, motivated community members can look at upgrading to mainline. It's still libre software after all :). > >Entire OSes need to be redone otherwise. > >L. > > > >-- >--- >crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 >___ >arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk >http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook >Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Intel's at it again
On 9 June 2019 17:38:55 GMT-04:00, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 10:10 PM Paul Boddie wrote: >> Paul >> >> P.S. Any news on the production front? > > mike's manager's quit, and the production knowledge which we learned >and accumulated through the samples has gone with him. > > mike and i need to re-learn and recall the information. Damn Luke, EOMA68 really can't catch a break can it. > >l. > >___ >arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk >http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook >Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Reframing The Holy War
On December 10, 2018 8:48:56 AM EST, Hendrik Boom wrote: >On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 12:45:42AM +0100, Paul Boddie wrote: >> >> Of course, one could look more closely at microkernel-based systems >for a >> possible remedy. Sadly, ever since the famous Torvalds versus >Tanenbaum >> discussion, plenty of people cling to the remarks of the former as he >sought >> to ridicule the work of the latter, oblivious to the fact that... >> >> 1. Microkernel performance was always a tradeoff (acknowledged by >the DMERT >> work done by Bell Labs in the 1970s and in other contemporary >work). >> 2. Performance has improved substantially over the years and in some >cases >> wasn't that bad to begin with, either. >> 3. Billions of devices have shipped with microkernels. >> >> Some people also probably cling to the idea that Torvalds "won" his >debate. >> Now that MINIX 3 runs in every Intel CPU supporting Management Engine > >> functionality, it is clear who actually won, at least in terms of the >"bottoms >> on seats" measure of success that the Linux kernel developers tend to > >> emphasise over things like GPL compliance by vendors (some of those >vendors >> being Linux Foundation members, of course). > >Just curious -- what microkernel systems are available to run on modern > >home computers just in case one is tired of Linux and wanting to try >something else? MINIX and GNU Hurd both exist and work. Hardware support isn't great however, might not work on the specific machine you have. > >-- hendrik > >___ >arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk >http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook >Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Questioning The Holy War
On December 8, 2018 10:28:18 AM EST, Chris Tyler wrote: >On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 7:07 AM Pablo Rath wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 04:52:22PM -0500, Hendrik Boom wrote: >> > On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 12:59:44PM +0100, Pablo Rath wrote: >> > > >> > > How do you know if the source is closed? :) >> > >> > Let's assume this is a real question. >> >> Hendrik, I am sorry. I see, I have phrased my (rhetoric) question >> poorly. What I meant and should have written is mor like: "How can >you >> know if a >> software behaves well and doesn't shoot the cat when you can't audit >the >> source code?" >> > >I must point out an error here: Ken Thompson proved that auditing >source >code (of software and the toolchain used to build it) is meaningless in >his >paper "Reflections on Trusting Trust". His talk didn't show that it's meaningless but that its not always sufficient. > That paper/talk was released 34 >years ago, and it wasn't theoretical -- it was based on malware that >he'd >successfully released into the wild many years before. > >(That said, I still prefer to be able to read the source -- just saying >we >shouldn't attribute disproven benefits to source reading!). > >-Chris >___ >arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk >http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook >Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Should we support libre.computer's efforts at promoting lima?
On October 17, 2018 4:43:29 PM GMT+09:00, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >USD $1m would fund the Libre RISC-V 3D GPU effort through to 100% >completion including quite likely actual test silicon in a smaller >geometry like 65 / 55nm (700mhz or so, which for a GPU would be damn >good). > >l. That would be a way better use of $1 million USD IMO. Would much rather have an open GPU than constantly be playing catchup reversing proprietary GPUs. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Patent-Left
On February 21, 2018 7:49:06 AM EST, Jean Flamelle wrote: > >None of these standards organizations have problems owning patents, >only free culture advocates do. Maybe some slight cognitive dissonance >is involved (sorry to say so bluntly Luke), but, if these types of >precedents are to be held up absent patents-held, that would mean an >expansion of standard copyright I don't think many courts would be >comfortable with. > >At the end of the day, if people can just copy the standard >disregarding anyone present as a certification entity, there is no >economic support to be had for anyone involved. It wouldn't agree with >my morals if someone had to ask Luke's permission to make an EOMA >card, but I know otherwise isn't practical yet. Anyone can make an EOMA card, just like you can make a USB device or PCI Express card. However you cannot use the EOMA certification mark without Luke's permission. Just like you can't use the USB certification mark (that little USB Compatible sticker you see on the box of any USB peripheral) without the permission of the USB authority. This is done to protect consumers. If something bears the certification mark of a standard, then you as a consumer can be confident that it is compatible with the standard, that it will work with your other USB devices or your existing EOMA enclosure. It's the same as the free software foundations Respects Your Freedom mark. You need the permission of the FSF to use that mark. This protects consumer because they can see that mark and be confident that the device respects their freedoms. This is why Luke is very vocal about protecting the EOMA mark. If a bunch of projects are built that purport to be EOMA compatible devices, and they end up being incompatible or worse dangerous, it will make the EOMA certification mark useless and destroy the reputation of the project as a whole, stopping any hope of EOMA having the global impact were aiming for. First impressions are everything in technology. If rumours start that EOMA cards aren't as compatible as advertised or are dangerous, most people will write off the project in their minds as a failure and never look at it again. You don't need anyone's permission to follow a standard, you do need their permission to market yourself as having done so. This protects consumers and IMO is a good thing. I like the confidence the RYF mark gives me when I'm shopping for electronics. I think there's some misconceptions about what Luke is trying to prevent. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] updates from eoma68-a20
On January 28, 2018 2:22:03 PM EST, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >folks, gotta do another update, i'm leaving for brussels in 16 hours >time. i have about *six* different things / meetings to do from the >2nd-4th, i'm then going to the UK from the 7th to the 20th and back >again to Taiwan. i'm hand-couriering the remaining 2.7.4 Cards and >the Microdesktop Housings there, and will leave them there and get >them sent on. adam i'm thinking of you particularly. > >l. > >___ >arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk >http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook >Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk Great! You're doing great work Luke, keep it up! ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] updates from eoma68-a20
On January 28, 2018 10:36:45 AM EST, Alexander Ross wrote: >While 2gb ram would be great, I am wiling to accept compromise. With >hope/thinking that i guess finishing first card, means next-gen cpu >card >could get more focus after the first one is out :D (pending sponsoring >i >assume). Look forward to lots of ram for that one instead heh :) I think getting to the next gen card is really important. The specifics of this card are really not a big deal in my opinion. It's already a bit outdated, and gets more so with each delay. But that's fine. The big opportunity here is once this card and associated housings is actually in people's hands, then they can experience the upgrade process with the next card comes out. That's the whole point of EOMA68 in the first place. To modularize your computing so upgrades are cheaper, easier and less wasteful. I think people are getting too caught up on how to make the a20 the perfect card, but that misses the big picture. This isn't a one off single board computer, it's a bootstrap of an ecosystem. And rather than try to make the first board perfect, it's more important to just get the first board done and move on to the second and third boards to really get the ecosystem going. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Meltdown and Spectre
Hendrik Boom writes: > On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 06:13:45PM -0500, Adam Van Ymeren wrote: >> Louis Pearson writes: >> >> > Has anybody else seen the recently published exploits Meltdown and Spectre? >> > Here's a link: https://meltdownattack.com/ >> >> The thing about Meltdown/Spectre is that they're really only problems if >> you rely on sandboxing to run untrusted code. > > It doesn't care whether you sandbox. It makes a privilege escalation > possible. If untrustworthy code runs with few privileges, it can > exfiltrate enough information to accomplish a privilege escalation. The > point of mentioneing the sandbox is simply that the sandbox doesn't > help. Yeah I didn't phrase that quite right. I meant that these vulnerabilites make it impossible to sandbox malicious code. > > Of courses it doesn't matter if you trust the code. It matters if it is > trustworthy. Indeed. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Meltdown and Spectre
Louis Pearson writes: > Has anybody else seen the recently published exploits Meltdown and Spectre? > Here's a link: https://meltdownattack.com/ The thing about Meltdown/Spectre is that they're really only problems if you rely on sandboxing to run untrusted code. This should be more incentive to run on fully free software. If the only code you run on your machine is free software, then there's essentially zero risk of Meltdown/Spectre being an issue. An important point to highlight is that this includes JavaScript that most people run in the browser. The JavaScript Trap [1] as Stallman explained a few years ago. If people can take back control of their computing but running free software and moving off virtual servers to dedicated serveres or their own product like FreedomBox [2] then issues like meltdown/spectre don't matter. [1] - https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/javascript-trap.ja-en.html [2] - https://freedomboxfoundation.org/ ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing
On December 28, 2017 12:17:14 PM EST, Pen-Yuan Hsing wrote: >Interesting, I haven't heard of GNU Taler. But please excuse my >ignorance: Reading the official website doesn't help me understand >exactly what it is. Can you explain (or link to a good explanation)? > >On 28/12/17 17:11, Julie Marchant wrote: >> gnu taler seems sufficient to me. We don't need crypto currency, a >way to anonymously and securely transfer actual money should do just >fine. >> -- >> Julie Marchant >> https://onpon4.github.io >> >> On Dec 28, 2017 11:32 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Sam Huntress > wrote: >>> Currently Bitcoin is an insane gold-rush bubble that is frivolous >and wasteful but it has the potential to balance out into the secure, distributed, democratized digital currency it was designed to be >and I think that is something worth spending energy on. >>> >>> indeed... would it not be worthwhile, do you think, to leverage >>> *this* opportunity... such that the funds were available to *create* >>> an eco-responsible coin that is *properly* libre, properly >>> peer-to-peer distributed, and so on? >>> >>> look at what i put out only a few weeks ago, we analysed at least >two >>> alt-coins that, whilst the people behind it had their hearts in the >>> right places they *still* did not fundamentally get it. >>> >>> if we don't do this "properly" then those alt-coins will be all that >>> is available... oh and bitcoin. is that something we really really >>> want? >>> >>> gone midnight here (julie) i'll write a more complete reply >tomorrow. >>> >>> l. > >___ >arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk >http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook >Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk GNU Taler is like a digital IOU system. It issues cryptographic tokens that are basically like IOUs for fiat currency. I transfer money from my bank to an exchange and receive tokens. I spent my tokens with a vendor. The vendor redeems tokens with the exchange to get fiat money into their bank account. Theres more too it in the protocols that provides anonymity for the spender and an auditable log for the exchange, the ability to provide "change" for a transactio, nbut that's the gist of it. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
[Arm-netbook] Top Priority Software Tasks
Hey Luke, As I eagerly await the preproduction board, I figure it would be a good idea to touch base on what needs doing on the software side. I've started looking at http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/source_code/ for inspiration. But I'd like to know which tasks are a priority for you to deliver the current crowd supply pledges. Cheers! Hope the Shenzen was fun. -Adam ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
[Arm-netbook] Cost of pre-production prototypes?
Hey Luke, Your latest crowd supply update mentions wanting people to buy the pre-production prototypes and ideally help contribute to the software. How much are you planning to sell them for? I'd be interested in one, and I'd love to help contribute to the software side of this project as it's much more within my skill set than high frequency HDMI routing. Cheers, -Adam ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] severe systemd bugs (two of them)
Jonathan Frederickson writes: >> this one example underscores that "freedom" - having access to the >> source - is no longer the only factor, meaning that we are heavily and >> critically deependent on decisions made by distro maintainers. > > Again, this has always been the case! Unless you're packaging things > yourself, you're dependent on the distro maintainers (or sometimes the > upstream developers) to package them for you, or you have to install > them outside the package manager which carries its own set of risks. > > The distro maintainers have to manage their (often limited and unpaid) > time wisely. In Debian's case, choosing systemd as the init system > means that package maintainers only have to write much shorter systemd > service files instead of longer sysvinit-style startup scripts. As a > developer, I can certainly understand that decision. It's unfortunate that systemd is seen as necessary to get these shorter service files for service declaration. Or that sysvinit requires you to write long complicated init scripts. Rather than replacing the init system, it would be possible to write a standalone tool to interpret service files that sysvinit can call. This works because sysvinit and other early UNIX init systems are written as separate components, that interact by running other exectuables/commands. This is the opposite to how systemd is architected where it moves more functionality into the same executable, making it less flexible and extensible as a result. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Standards Organization as a Potentially Universal Free/Libre Software Developement Sustenance Model
do...@mail.com writes: > I give up. Why do some people dislike github or sourceforge? > This is at least the third mailing list in which I've seen discontent > without a reason given. Same reason they dislike proprietary software in general. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] More Libre Hardware Getting Funded
On May 5, 2017 4:06:38 PM EDT, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Bill Kontos >wrote: >> Ok I stand corrected them. So this basically means we are not going >to see >> any NAS products from an eoma standard ? > > maybe when a USB3 SoC comes out, making the speed worthwhile. Would EOMA200 be suitable with its pcie and sata interfaces? > >l. > >___ >arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk >http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook >Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] SPI-based LCDs, 3D printing, RISC-V
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton writes: > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Adam Van Ymeren wrote: > >> This is why I was thinking of letting Luke do the printing and order >> of printers, just having the crowd put up funds for the purchase of >> printers, which the backers would receive the printer after the >> laptops have shipped. > > one concern is: my partner really doesn't want our apartment to be > turned into a factory. also this is likely to take place during > summer, which here in taiwan apparently hit FORTY FIVE (centigrade) > last year. yes we have air conditioning units but all the same... Hmm, lots of conflicting requirements here :). How many printers do you think you need operating to produce the parts in a reasonable time frame? > > l. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] SPI-based LCDs, 3D printing, RISC-V
On April 27, 2017 11:36:30 AM EDT, Peter Carlson wrote: >Having just got into 3D printing myself I would suggest it is not yet a >plug and play experience yet. Although the printer I got was very >definitely a DIY project requiring assembly etc. the groups I am >following >also suggests to me that quality is very definitely an acquired skill >that >comes through experience. I had thought of volunteering my printers to >complete the process for this project but I am not certain that my >printing >is up to the quality standards and as such I am not sure that I would >want >the stress of trying to turning out a product that I may not be >experienced >enough to do. I would think the only way to do a crowd source printing >would require getting sample prints from each participant for >evaluation. This is why I was thinking of letting Luke do the printing and order of printers, just having the crowd put up funds for the purchase of printers, which the backers would receive the printer after the laptops have shipped. > A process that would be quite time consuming I think. One mans' opinion. > >On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 9:16 AM Adam Van Ymeren wrote: > >> On April 27, 2017 9:23:40 AM EDT, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton < >> l...@lkcl.net> wrote: >> >On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Christian Kellermann >> > wrote: >> > >> >> As the current issue is time in producing them I would also >scratch >> >> the printed parts order myself, maybe in exchange for a discount >on >> >> future designs done by Luke and print them myself. People with >access >> >> to a maker lab could consider doing the same... >> >> >> >> I am not capable to promise good quality printing for 3rd parties >as >> >I >> >> have been starting getting into this for a rather short while >now... >> > >> > well, a 200x200 basic reprap will do the job, with a 0.4mm nozzle >and >> >a layer height of between 0.15 and 0.2mm is absolutely fine. it's >not >> >hugely difficult. i've just ordered this ($140!!) 3D printer from a >> >taobao seller, it's arriving in a couple of days: >> > >> > https://world.taobao.com/item/526287577504.htm >> >> Here's a thought, if you're okay running a fleet of printers, what if >we >> crowd funded a fleet of 3d printers, whereby people pay for printers, >you >> do a bulk order of printers, use them to print the parts and then >> distribute the printers to backers. Sort of like a promotional >thing, you >> can receive one of the printers that was used to make your laptop. >> >> > >> >now, at $140 i am quite happy to get up to 10 of those (if the first >> >one checks out fine) - it looks *really* sturdy: 20x20 aluminium >> >box-section: my only concern about rigidity being that it uses >> >L-brackets which go *into* the frame rather than triangle-corners >> >which are bolted outside and lock the box-section absolutely solid. >> >but, we'll see what happens. >> > >> > also it looks like it has a clone of the E3Dv6 hot-end (which is >> >really good), it has trapezoidal z-axis lead screws with proper >brass >> >nuts, borosilicate glass plate (to be confirmed). >> > >> > the one thing i have told the guy (and he's happy to give a RMB 70 >> >discount): i do NOT want the f*-s***-for-brains RAMPS 1.4 >> >controller. if you're familiar with 3D printing for f***'s sake >STAY >> >AWAY from ANYTHING that uses the brain-dead "Polulu" driver >"modules". >> >RAMPS, RUMBA, Lerdge, Megatronics - just don't f*g well do it. >> > >> > the reason is really really simple: those QFN ICs are designed >> >SPECIFICALLY, as outlined CLEARLY IN THE DATASHEET, for the heat to >be >> >dissipated THROUGH THE PCB. there is a ceramic insulator on the TOP >> >OF THE CHIP which ACTIVELY PREVENTS HEAT DISSIPATING THROUGH THE >TOP. >> >if you put a heat sink on top of the chip it does... nothing. >> > >> > now, when the first reprap was created, in order to save time and >> >development cost they bought some PROTOTYPING boards with the >stepper >> >drivers pre-mounted, which came with SPECIFIC instructions "under no >> >circumstances use these in production". >> > >> > so what happens? >> > >> > well, they (a) burn out (b) overheat (c) stop working for a couple >of >> >seconds at a time in the middle of a print... >> &
Re: [Arm-netbook] SPI-based LCDs, 3D printing, RISC-V
On April 27, 2017 9:23:40 AM EDT, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Christian Kellermann > wrote: > >> As the current issue is time in producing them I would also scratch >> the printed parts order myself, maybe in exchange for a discount on >> future designs done by Luke and print them myself. People with access >> to a maker lab could consider doing the same... >> >> I am not capable to promise good quality printing for 3rd parties as >I >> have been starting getting into this for a rather short while now... > > well, a 200x200 basic reprap will do the job, with a 0.4mm nozzle and >a layer height of between 0.15 and 0.2mm is absolutely fine. it's not >hugely difficult. i've just ordered this ($140!!) 3D printer from a >taobao seller, it's arriving in a couple of days: > > https://world.taobao.com/item/526287577504.htm Here's a thought, if you're okay running a fleet of printers, what if we crowd funded a fleet of 3d printers, whereby people pay for printers, you do a bulk order of printers, use them to print the parts and then distribute the printers to backers. Sort of like a promotional thing, you can receive one of the printers that was used to make your laptop. > >now, at $140 i am quite happy to get up to 10 of those (if the first >one checks out fine) - it looks *really* sturdy: 20x20 aluminium >box-section: my only concern about rigidity being that it uses >L-brackets which go *into* the frame rather than triangle-corners >which are bolted outside and lock the box-section absolutely solid. >but, we'll see what happens. > > also it looks like it has a clone of the E3Dv6 hot-end (which is >really good), it has trapezoidal z-axis lead screws with proper brass >nuts, borosilicate glass plate (to be confirmed). > > the one thing i have told the guy (and he's happy to give a RMB 70 >discount): i do NOT want the f*-s***-for-brains RAMPS 1.4 >controller. if you're familiar with 3D printing for f***'s sake STAY >AWAY from ANYTHING that uses the brain-dead "Polulu" driver "modules". >RAMPS, RUMBA, Lerdge, Megatronics - just don't f*g well do it. > > the reason is really really simple: those QFN ICs are designed >SPECIFICALLY, as outlined CLEARLY IN THE DATASHEET, for the heat to be >dissipated THROUGH THE PCB. there is a ceramic insulator on the TOP >OF THE CHIP which ACTIVELY PREVENTS HEAT DISSIPATING THROUGH THE TOP. >if you put a heat sink on top of the chip it does... nothing. > > now, when the first reprap was created, in order to save time and >development cost they bought some PROTOTYPING boards with the stepper >drivers pre-mounted, which came with SPECIFIC instructions "under no >circumstances use these in production". > > so what happens? > > well, they (a) burn out (b) overheat (c) stop working for a couple of >seconds at a time in the middle of a print... > > ... you get the general idea. > >so anyway i ordered a Melzi 2.0 from here: > >https://www.aliexpress.com/store/group/Melzi-board/1757194_500507171.html > >and it turns out that on the reprap wiki there's a mod to them which >allows for the connection of a BT UART. it would have been handy if >those pins had been brought out on a header but hey, what's wrong with >a bit of soldering. > >if you don't want to do soldering then you can just put the Melzi 2.0 >into "auto-load" mode, drop a file in a FAT32 filesystem on a MicroSD >card and power it up. > >i like the Melzi 2. it's simple, relatively low-cost compared to some >of the other options, no-nonsense and straightforward. > >l. > >___ >arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk >http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook >Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] SPI-based LCDs, 3D printing, RISC-V
On April 27, 2017 6:50:39 AM EDT, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >ok so a quick status update: > >* Frida, in Shenzhen, have a customer currently ordering their 2.8in >FRD280J3703D SPI-based LCD. this means it's possible to place an >order for less than the normal MOQ of 1,000 so we go with that one for >the 15in laptop. > >* i calculated that for the microdesktop i have an ENTIRE MONTH of >3d-printing to do, and a YEAR for the laptop. there's an update going >out about this soon but basically i need help. ideas or actual >practical help. Are there companies that you could hire to do the bulk of the 3d printing? Any idea what the quality and/or cost would be? Is there any feasibility of producing the laptop parts via injection molding, but preserving the design in a way that end users could still print replacement parts? Seems like this would require a large redesign investment but could save time and money manufacturing. > >* i'm investigating RISC-V *long-term*, i will start a separate thread >about this (immediately after writing this) so am reaching out to >various people to see who's interested. > >l. > >--- >crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > >___ >arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk >http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook >Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] SoC warp soldering risk?
On April 23, 2017 1:20:47 AM EDT, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > it's also why i haven't done a smart (or dumb) phone, because >*without* that smaller size (due to "stacking") you simply can't make >a small enough PCB for it to be socially acceptable, these days. I would totally buy and use a phone large enough to fit an eoma68 CPU card. But there may not be wide enough appeal to get the costs down to a reasonable number. There was a lot of hype around the ability to dock your phone into a desktop so you only have to carry one computer. It should be possible to ride off of that hype by demonstrating popping your CPU card out and putting it in a desktop/laptop housing and vice versa. It just makes so much more sense to separate the core CPU card from the "peripherals" like you did with EOMA. > ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] ZeroPhone
Interesting. Any chance you can link to some documentation about the network
neighbourhood protocol? Or outline what about it made it so resilient? Thanks!
Original Message
From: l...@lkcl.net
Sent: April 17, 2017 3:07 AM
To: arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
Reply-to: arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] ZeroPhone
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 4:46 AM, John Luke Gibson wrote:
> abstract concept). So, ultimately, (at the very least) the degree of
> viability of addresses needs to be limited for practical reasons. Some
> might associate the suggestion of limiting this viability to
> possessors of addresses who facilitate the delivery delivery of
> messages to a higher degree than they strain the delivery of messages
> {(especially [or particularly, if you will] with the volume of
> messages-to-be-delivered-added),
i'm familiar with the microsoft network neighbourhood, having
implemented it back in 1996-1998 for samba-tng. it's well-known as a
"chatty" protocol (which is down to mis-configuration).
so it was pretty much universally hated so people dropped it.
then of course as the years go by people FORGET that the network
neighbourhood is one of the most amazingly resilient and strategically
fundamental resources that a network can have.
... so the free software community invented avahi and zeroconf.
and guess what? it's *just* as chatty, and just as hated. it's also
totally broken by design, failing to implement key strategic features
that would otherwise make it resilient.
the really fucking irritating thing, for me, is that it's based on an
extension of the DNS protocol JUST LIKE THE NETWORK NEIGHBOURHOOD.
*sigh*.
anyway. working out "addresses" - as well as publishing and
defending names - is a known and solved problem, john.
l.
___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] ZeroPhone
n point to physical location (which I would prefer to use the term
>> Sybil [or at least "identity"] to describe anything which would
>> Normally be described as an address which Doesn't point to physical
>> location). Additionally they can be considered scarce in that it is
>> unsustainable to deliver messages to individual possessors of
>> addresses, whom don't help the delivery of messages (atleast, as an
>> abstract concept). So, ultimately, (at the very least) the degree of
>> viability of addresses needs to be limited for practical reasons. Some
>> might associate the suggestion of limiting this viability to
>> possessors of addresses who facilitate the delivery delivery of
>> messages to a higher degree than they strain the delivery of messages
>> {(especially [or particularly, if you will] with the volume of
>> messages-to-be-delivered-added), with "capitalism". I would like to
>> emphasize that this is not a concept of either "capitalism" or
>> "socialism" (or any their like currently being formed outside of the
>> occident) , (both of which rely on the fairly novel social construct
>> of a "stock" and/or banking/"monetary fund"-management)} but-rather
>> simple self-sustainability. Of course, if at a given point the
>> collective infrastructure {(or atleast relevant parts thereof) ,
>> (with-which many people have agreed is acceptable for delivering
>> messages according to a system of determining which messages are given
>> the most priority that they have agreed is acceptable)} is
>> under-strained (or under-utilized, if you will) according to it's
>> maximum potential for helping people communicate, it should probably
>> begin to deliver messages "gratis" or simply out of the goodness of
>> doing so which is something a noob can plainly see the bitcoin
>> protocol tried to do by rewarding it's bitcoin miners, but failed to
>> realize: only sentient beings can effectively measure the potential
>> meaning to be had in helping another sentient being or the so-termed
>> "goodness" in doing so; that No protocol can account for what it's
>> like to help someone specific or every being one can; that It should
>> be up to every individual exactly who they help or what kind of Sybils
>> they help or to what degree and for what purpose. We are fundamentally
>> human, and we must remember our value is in our decision.
>>
>> On 4/16/17, Adam Van Ymeren wrote:
>>>
>>> Why do you want artificial scarcity of addresses? Either via bitcoin
>>> type
>>> system or some authority I don't see any benefit to artificial address
>>> scarcity.
>>>
>>>
>>> Original Message
>>> From: eaterjo...@gmail.com
>>> Sent: April 16, 2017 8:45 PM
>>> To: arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
>>> Reply-to: arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
>>> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] ZeroPhone
>>>
>>> Ultimately, isolation of the sim card or otherwise modem, should
>>> probably be the biggest concern. There are ethical concerns around
>>> artificial scarcity from telephone numbers and, to be fair, ipv4
>>> addresses, (metaphorical mints thereof having absolute decision-making
>>> authority giving infinite leverage as "benevolent dictators" who can
>>> simply crash everything if something doesn't go their way) that should
>>> be considered before dedicating too much priority to this task.
>>>
>>> A more perfect solution (longterm) would be a network with
>>> self-modulating scarcity of addresses, in a fashion reminiscent of
>>>
>>>
>>> bitcoin. However it would be prudent to construct a language the
>>> anti-thesis of esoteric (top-down, expressing this anti-thesis on all
>>> levels of design) to describe the underlining software in and make the
>>> networking protocol more accepting of contrarian behavior.
>>>
>>> If this sounds like a lot, consider that for a person with no
>>> experience computer design, it should be easier to learn as they go
>>> when designing this, than to pick up all the computer design wisdom
>>> necessary to retrofit or "reverse-engineer" literally self-described
>>> as esoteric systems. Is there not a fundament to computers, computer
>>> design, and network engineering, that is intuitive to beings not
>>> fortunate enough to be included in the circles of any so-called
>>> esotericism of any kind?
>>>
>>> I apologize
Re: [Arm-netbook] ZeroPhone
Why do you want artificial scarcity of addresses? Either via bitcoin type system or some authority I don't see any benefit to artificial address scarcity. Original Message From: eaterjo...@gmail.com Sent: April 16, 2017 8:45 PM To: arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk Reply-to: arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] ZeroPhone Ultimately, isolation of the sim card or otherwise modem, should probably be the biggest concern. There are ethical concerns around artificial scarcity from telephone numbers and, to be fair, ipv4 addresses, (metaphorical mints thereof having absolute decision-making authority giving infinite leverage as "benevolent dictators" who can simply crash everything if something doesn't go their way) that should be considered before dedicating too much priority to this task. A more perfect solution (longterm) would be a network with self-modulating scarcity of addresses, in a fashion reminiscent of bitcoin. However it would be prudent to construct a language the anti-thesis of esoteric (top-down, expressing this anti-thesis on all levels of design) to describe the underlining software in and make the networking protocol more accepting of contrarian behavior. If this sounds like a lot, consider that for a person with no experience computer design, it should be easier to learn as they go when designing this, than to pick up all the computer design wisdom necessary to retrofit or "reverse-engineer" literally self-described as esoteric systems. Is there not a fundament to computers, computer design, and network engineering, that is intuitive to beings not fortunate enough to be included in the circles of any so-called esotericism of any kind? I apologize if my reliance on certain obscure terms, without interchanging any alternative phrasings made this email seem convoluted and difficult to understand. On 4/16/17, GaCuest wrote: > El 16 de abril de 2017 a las 12:42:43, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > (l...@lkcl.net) escribió: >> --- >> crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 11:05 AM, GaCuest wrote: >> > El 14 de abril de 2017 a las 7:37:24, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton >> > (l...@lkcl.net) escribió: >> >> the idea there is to use an LCD that has *dual* control interfaces: >> >> SPI *AND* RGB/TTL. >> > >> > Something like this?: >> > http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/shenzen/frida/FRD3504503.pdf >> >> ... exactly like that :) except i'm not a huge fan of resistive >> panels... they are quite a lot cheaper though. >> > > Yes, it was an example, I prefer CTP :) > > I think the idea that a cell phone can work without EOMA68 > (for basic functions) is a very good idea, but is it difficult to do? > I want to say because you have to do many things 2 times to > be able to work with EOMA68 and without EOMA68. > > On the other hand, is the STM32F072 capable of handling > the audio with good quality? > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Arm processors
I believe the next generation of EOMA68 cards will use the Rockchip RK3288 SoC. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockchip_RK3288 for specs on that. On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:48 PM, zap wrote: > I am curious, which processors are you considering by chance? > > If no one can tell me that's fine, but I am just curious how much ram > the highest one is as a limit/whether it is 32 bit or 64 bit and how > late in the future such things are. > > By the way, whenever I get around to it, I intend to, buy the libre > laptop, if systemd is really problem, I don't care if you want to remove > it as long as you do it well. :) > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Logging and journaling
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 02:59:02PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > wrote: > > --- > > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Stefan Monnier > wrote: > > > > > W.r.t to logging, I've agree that you're probably better off logging to > > > RAM (or to a remote host) than to a local "disk", and AFAIK that's the > > > default behavior of systemd anyway. > > > > with the exception of fedora which has only a few backers i will NOT > > be distributing a filesystem which contains the completely > > unethically-developed and very dangerous systemd application. having > > evaluated its development, watched the predicted security > > vulnerabilities unfold and cause massive disruption, and witnessed its > > "ram it down people's throats" deployment without due consideration or > > consultation with end-users, nor the distros respecting end-users > > rights to NOT be forced into using it, i cannot and will not be > > associated or endorse such totally unethical behaviour, so will be > > removing it from all rootfs images. post-distribution, if people then > > wish to undo that because they find systemd to be useful and have no > > objections to its usage they are entirely free to do so. > > I very much like systemd and can hardly see myself using a system > without it. Thus I will personally want to have systemd on my systems. > Please don't make that too difficult a task for me. > > That is: you don't like systemd? fine. Installing Debian without it is > rather simple: > https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd Please don't spread this mis-information. Installing Debian without systemd is far from simple, and many things just won't work right as systemd has become a dependency on more and more packages. It's possible, yes, but it's not simple, not supported, and tends to leave the user debugging weird behaviours. > > In that case, all I'll have to do would be to install a few more > packages (and maybe disable syslog logging to reduce unnecessary disk > writes, and similar tweaks). > > However, if "removing it from the rootfs" means something similar to > Devuan, then It'll probably be simpler for me to reinstall the image > with a proper Debian system. > > Please don't make my life complicated. > > -- > Tzafrir Cohen | tzaf...@jabber.org | VIM is > http://tzafrir.org.il || a Mutt's > tzaf...@cohens.org.il || best > tzaf...@debian.org|| friend > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk > ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Logging and journaling
On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 2:54 PM, mike.v...@gmail.com wrote: > > > Op 8 feb. 2017 16:11 schreef "Julie Marchant" : > > On 02/08/2017 09:46 AM, mike.v...@gmail.com wrote: > > NAND wear is probably more linked to age than number of writes. > > No, NAND is flash memory, it has a definite limit on the number of times > it can be written to (in each sector, that is). It doesn't matter how > old flash memory is, if you reach its write limit, it's useless. > > All flash memory is like this, including most SSDs. The only variation > is what the limit is and what the firmware does to compensate. So one > might take more writes than another, but regardless, every write > *necessarily* brings it closer to the end of its life. > > . > > That's debatable: > https://www.google.nl/amp/embedded#amp=http%253A%252F% > 252Fwww.zdnet.com%252Fgoogle-amp%252Farticle%252Fssd- > reliability-in-the-real-world-googles-experience%252F&idx=0 > Link doesn't work for me (Thanks Google!) but this one does. http://www.zdnet.com/article/ssd-reliability-in-the-real-world-googles-experience/ Assuming this is what you meant to link to. > > > > -- > Julie Marchant > https://onpon4.github.io > > Protect your emails with GnuPG: > https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org > > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk > > > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk > ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] First laptop dock for Intel's card announced
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > --- > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Allan Mwenda wrote: >> You should patent all the things before Intel just i n case they REALLY >> decide they thought of this first > > or... i should publish all of them via the mailing list, wiki, irc > channel with its independently publicly-recorded logs (in two separate > locations), as well as maintain a git repository which records the > chronological order (to the second) of all changes made to the > website, which will be corroborated by archive.org (an independent > organisation), and maintain a standard on an independent website > (elinux.org) over which i have no direct control in its > administration, thus confirming in at least a dozen different ways, > witnessed by several hundred other people, that there exists prior > art, through which i can simply tell anyone trying to claim that they > own any patents related to *any* of the EOMA68 modular designs, that > they can go fuck themselves. how about that? ;) I like it :) > > l. > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Question about resolution on the micro-desktop
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Lyberta wrote: >> i'm not going to make any such restrictions in software. if someone >> plugs in a 1080p VGA monitor, and through the EDID interface it's >> detected, and the OS and the SoC is capable of it, good for them. > > And what if there is no EDID? Then you're using a really esoteric display and you'll have to manually configure the modes in your software. > > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Price Bump: Was that for Wholesale?
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Julie Marchant wrote: > On 01/09/2017 04:23 PM, John Luke Gibson wrote: >> Noticed the cards themselves jumped from 40 to 65, and I was wondering >> if that was due to unforeseen costs per card or to attract wholesalers >> and retailers with special discounts? I don't really have an opinion >> either way with wholesale, in terms of economic >> responsibility/efficiency it has it's drawbacks and advantages. > > Your memory is wrong. The price of the cards has always been $65. We have always been at war with Eurasia. Seriously though I checked my order history, they were definitely $65 back when I ordered in July. > > -- > Julie Marchant > https://onpon4.github.io > > Protect your emails with GnuPG: > https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org > > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] new development laptop needed, looking at dell xps 13 9350
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 10:08:33AM -0500, Adam Van Ymeren wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:41 AM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: >> > On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 04:49:36PM +0100, Ythogtha wrote: >> > >> >> I'm new on this list, so hello everybody :) >> >> >> >> If I may make a small remark... >> >> I feel that somehow, having a library installed only to know wether some >> >> other >> >> software is present or not feels the wrong way to do things. >> > >> > I don't have SELinux enabled on my system. Still many core components on >> > my system are linked with libselinux.so.1. Will you fork Debian to >> > patch out the SELinux support? >> >> I don't see libselinux.so.1 on my debian system. > > That sounds odd. It is a dependency of e.g. dpkg, coreutils and > util-linux. All three are essential packages (that is: must be > installed on the system). Thus also their dependencies must be > installed. > > See the output of: > > ldd /bin/ls | grep selinux > > dpkg -L libselinux1 I ended up finding it after someone else suggested something similar. It wasn't where I expected and I didn't search very hard :). > > -- > Tzafrir Cohen | tzaf...@jabber.org | VIM is > http://tzafrir.org.il || a Mutt's > tzaf...@cohens.org.il || best > tzaf...@debian.org|| friend > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] new development laptop needed, looking at dell xps 13 9350
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:41 AM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 04:49:36PM +0100, Ythogtha wrote: > >> I'm new on this list, so hello everybody :) >> >> If I may make a small remark... >> I feel that somehow, having a library installed only to know wether some >> other >> software is present or not feels the wrong way to do things. > > I don't have SELinux enabled on my system. Still many core components on > my system are linked with libselinux.so.1. Will you fork Debian to > patch out the SELinux support? I don't see libselinux.so.1 on my debian system. > > What is the actual overhead? > > libsystemd0 takes 646kb of disk space. It adds a negligible amount of > memory and run time (for the case of not using systemd). > > Removing it adds a huge amount of > >> Software already have dependencies and depency checking, wether it is >> at >> build-time or run-time. >> If you write a software that could use any part of systemd, you >> shouldn't force the presence of libsystemd to find out if the parts you might >> want are present ! >> Either it is a compile-time feature, then if you compile it without >> systemd, you'll have to rebuild it again if you decide to install systemd, >> or it >> is a run-time feature, and a simple check for dynamically loading a shared >> library should be enough to know wether libsystemd is present. >> >> So I don't see the point in having libsystemd if you do not have any >> part of systemd installed ! >> >> >> When I build ffmpeg, I don't need a lib_is_lame_present to be able to >> use lame if it is present ! Either I build it with LAME=yes, and it will >> fail if >> lame isn't there, or it will pass. What would be the point of having some >> other >> library installed to know wether or not lame is there ? >> And if it weren't a compile-time dependency, but a dynamically loaded >> library at runtime, the code just has to try to load the library and report >> that >> the functionality isn't present if it fails. > > You confuse Debian with Gentoo. Gentoo is a distribution for those who > rebuild all of their packages with various options. Along the way the > unique sets of options lets the trigger their own unique bugs and thus > they help test the various softwares. > > Debian is a binary distribution. There is a single set of build options > for each package. > >> >> It should be the same for a software using systemd. Either it is >> compiled with libsystemd, therefore you need it to run it. Or it detects at >> run-time wether a particular functionality is there, and there is no need to >> rely on having libsystemd present to do that. > > How do you detect this at run time? Every program should write its own > (buggy) test? No, it should use an existing test. Use libsystemd. > >> The middle ground being to compile with libsystemd, and use it to >> detect >> wether it is actually working and a specific functionality is available. But >> it >> seems easy enough to allow for compiling without libsystemd and then assuming >> sysytemd is never there and none of its functionality are usable. >> Rebuild it if things changes, that is the way to do it. > > This works in Gentoo. Not in Debian. > > -- > Tzafrir Cohen | tzaf...@jabber.org | VIM is > http://tzafrir.org.il || a Mutt's > tzaf...@cohens.org.il || best > tzaf...@debian.org|| friend > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] laptop battery lessons...
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 12:07 PM, wrote: > The "URL" says as Nickel, not as Lithium. > Which is right? The PDF that the URL links to says: "Li-ion(NiCoMn) Polymer Battery Cell Specification" So its a lithium ion nickel polymer battery? Haha I have no idea what I'm reading. > > On 16.12.6 16:30, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >> >> On 12/6/16, Julie Marchant wrote: > > ~ > >> >>> Actually, are you even using a LiPo battery? Plain Li-ion batteries are >>> rigid and don't have this problem. >> >> >> just reading the datasheet... Lithium Ion (LiCoMn) >> >> should be here: >> >> >> http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/laptop_15in/EV%20GPNCM62135160%2010Ah%20NiCoMn%20battery%20cell.pdf >> > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] new development laptop needed, looking at dell xps 13 9350
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On 12/6/16, Adam Van Ymeren wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 5:55 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton >> wrote: >>> *sigh* argh i can just feel that, after thinking it through, 16GB >>> simply isn't going to be enough, long-term. >> >> Just a thought, seeing as you are already in/near China, if you find a >> suitable laptop that supports 32GB, maybe you could save some money by >> buying such a laptop with the lowest amount memory they will sell you >> and then buying the 32GB separately from some local supplier? Maybe >> you've made some connections that can hook you up? > > this may come as a surprise but the actual amount of money saved is > not that great. it would appear that the zero-tariff trade deals with > the US result in the costs being practically the same. > Interesting, good to know. I was more thinking that the laptop manufacturers would markup the price itself to increase their margins. Last time I purchased a laptop I bought the SSD separately. > if i *did* find something that was reduced in cost significantly i > would be immediately suspicious. > > l. > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] new development laptop needed, looking at dell xps 13 9350
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 5:55 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > *sigh* argh i can just feel that, after thinking it through, 16GB > simply isn't going to be enough, long-term. Just a thought, seeing as you are already in/near China, if you find a suitable laptop that supports 32GB, maybe you could save some money by buying such a laptop with the lowest amount memory they will sell you and then buying the 32GB separately from some local supplier? Maybe you've made some connections that can hook you up? > > l. > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] new development laptop needed, looking at dell xps 13 9350
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Julie Marchant wrote: > Just my 2 cents: > > From what I've been gathering, Luke, this is the situation: you are used > to a very high spec setup capable of really large amounts of > multitasking and don't want to give up your current way of doing things, > so you are looking for a new laptop capable of this. There's nothing > wrong with that if you can find it. But maybe it would be worthwhile to > adjust your workflow so that it doesn't need an ultra-HD screen and > 16GB+ of RAM? There must be some way you can achieve that. > > These are the thoughts I have, in particular: > > * From what I understand, you use a DE that basically tiles all of the > programs you have open into whatever screen space you have, right? Have > you ever tried GNOME? That might be a good replacement for that if you > can get used to it. > > * Is it really necessary to have all of those programs open at the same > time? > > * Is it really necessary to use Chrome or Firefox? There are more > lightweight browsers out there, including text-based ones like elinks. > Disabling JavaScript can also help a lot with performance in general. > > * What if you had one laptop for openscad and other heavy or important > stuff, and another, cheaper laptop for Web browsing and other stuff like > that? > > * I'm wondering about that SSD. Are hard drive speeds really so bad that > you need one? Big SSDs are much more expensive than big hard drives. My > experience with a hard drive is that it's mostly start-up times that are > affected, so what I tend to do is log in and then go do something else > while everything loads, and then use the suspend to RAM feature if I > need to conserve battery for a short period of time. > > I'd also like to point out that learning to live with less than you're > used to would be really good for your public image, since after all, the > hardware you'll be selling for quite some time is nowhere near those > capabilities. ;) As it is now, for example, if someone says that what > you're selling isn't good enough, they have you as an example to back > that claim up. But if you manage to reduce your needs and eventually > meet what EOMA hardware can achieve, then you would have your own > example to refute that, and you would even have experience that you > could use to advise people on what sorts of changes to make to the way > they do things. Food for thought. The real solution is to get EOMA-200 rolling with 32GB of RAM :). > > -- > Julie Marchant > https://onpon4.github.io > > Protect your emails with GnuPG: > https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org > > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 laptop housing battery control
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > --- > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Adam Van Ymeren wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Adam Van Ymeren wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Jonathan Frederickson >>> wrote: >>>> I'm curious, since unlike most laptops the computer is in a separate >>>> unit... is the charge level of the battery reported to the OS as it >>>> would be for a traditional laptop or phone? Would be interested to >>>> know if this is supported in general, only with certain CPU cards, or >>>> not at all. >>> >>> I would imagine the battery controller lives on the I2C bus which is >>> part of the EOMA68 pinout. >> >> Also as I understand it, this bus is a mandatory part of the standard, >> so any CPU card must contain an I2C bus and therefore will be able to >> talk to the battery controller (if that is indeed where the battery >> controller lives). >> >> I guess I should stop speculating, but this seems like a reasonable >> way to control the battery in an EOMA68 world. > > it's actually going to be connected to the STM32F072, which also > controls the power and has a RTC, and also controls the 320x240 LCD > display so that battery status can be displayed on that whilst the > Card is completely powered off. Oh interesting, sorry for speculating incorrectly. That small LCD screen is a really cool feature, and a clever idea for the touchpad. > > so, someone will need to write either userspace or kernelspace drivers > to provide the information to whatever OS is running, as i am > focussing on hardware design. that will need to be over the USB > interface to the STM32F072. > > l. > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 laptop housing battery control
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Adam Van Ymeren wrote: > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Jonathan Frederickson > wrote: >> I'm curious, since unlike most laptops the computer is in a separate >> unit... is the charge level of the battery reported to the OS as it >> would be for a traditional laptop or phone? Would be interested to >> know if this is supported in general, only with certain CPU cards, or >> not at all. > > I would imagine the battery controller lives on the I2C bus which is > part of the EOMA68 pinout. Also as I understand it, this bus is a mandatory part of the standard, so any CPU card must contain an I2C bus and therefore will be able to talk to the battery controller (if that is indeed where the battery controller lives). I guess I should stop speculating, but this seems like a reasonable way to control the battery in an EOMA68 world. > >> >> ___ >> arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk >> http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook >> Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 laptop housing battery control
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Jonathan Frederickson wrote: > I'm curious, since unlike most laptops the computer is in a separate > unit... is the charge level of the battery reported to the OS as it > would be for a traditional laptop or phone? Would be interested to > know if this is supported in general, only with certain CPU cards, or > not at all. I would imagine the battery controller lives on the I2C bus which is part of the EOMA68 pinout. > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] s5p6818
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 3:01 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > i've met with zhongweisemi (nexell's authorised agent in shenzen), > really nice people, i've got access to the s5p6818 and am doing a > conversion of one of their reference designs to eoma68. this board > will ***NOT*** be available as a replacement for eoma68-a20 > crowd-funded pledges, the pricing and MOQs had been set and may not be > renegotiated without significant loss of future business due to an > obviously adverse impact (reneging on promised orders). Are there plans to manufacture this board and have up available for sale? Or were you just setting them up with an EOMA68 reference design in case someone comes along later looking to build an EOMA68 board with the s5p6818? > > l. > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Housing idea: screenless laptop
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> Wouldn't that community better served by a "libre" (1) USB braille keyboard, >> that could be hooked to anything that has usb, and something like that >> as a display (I dont' know which technology those kind of displays need for >> cabling) > > But the user would still need to carry around that keyboard plus > a "standard" computer (I guess it could be a tablet). > > On the flip side a "braille EOMA housing" with an EOMA A20 card inside > could be turned into a "dumb USB braille keyboard" via the A20's > OTG port. Seems like a good use of an EOMA68 passthrough card. If you're not using the chassis to house a computer card, put a passthrough card in that exposes the keyboard as a USB port. > > > Stefan > > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] HDMI HEC on future boards
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Vincent Legoll wrote: >>> The EOMA68 standard has no provision for ethernet, but AFAIU the other >>> end of the CPU card can be more or less free to use. >> >> yyep > > That may be a good way to tackle SoC-specific functionalities, without wasting > them... An easy way to be even-more-earth-friendly... Think about > going the extra > mile, or squeezing every last bit out of it... Using the extra SoC specific functionalities might not necessarily be more earth friendly. Since your next computer card might not offer the same user facing interfaces that your old one did. The great thing about EOMA68 is that none of the functionality on the pinout end is optional. This means that all future computer cards will be compatible with all your existing enclosures, and vice versa, if you want to upgrade your enclosure you don't have to worry about it being incompatible with your existing computer card. This really cuts down on waste, since there's no risk of buying incompatible hardware, and you only have to upgrade the piece that is broken or outdated. If you rely on the user facing end for ethernet or HDMI or whatever, you can lock yourself into a situation where you can't upgrade your card or can't re-use your peripherals. > >>> So would it be possible to link a future SoC w/ ethernet to the HDMI HEC >>> pins and get at least a 100Mbps ethernet, without needing any USB dongle. >> >> yep! i wonder if there's ethernet already on the A20. > > Ah that would be extra-extra nice, but no cigar ;-) > > The H3 has one (even with an integrated 100Mbps PHY), that would be nice... > > -- > Vincent Legoll > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] One issue with the EOMA68 Wikipedia
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Adam Van Ymeren wrote: > On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 4:31 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > wrote: >> --- >> crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:20 PM, Mike Leimon wrote: >>> Luke, >>> >>> I took a quick glance at the Wikipedia entry and saw what I thought was an >>> error and I will fix the problem if you can confirm that I understand the >>> situation correctly. >>> >>> The wikipedia article says the following: >>> >>> """ >>> >>> There are two different physical profiles of EOMA68 (based around the legacy >>> PCMCIA classifications):[2] >>> >>> 54 mm × 85.6 mm; 5mm variant (Type II) >>> 54 mm × 85.6 mm; 3.3mm variant (Type I) >>> >>> Type I is reserved for up to 1366x768 RGB/TTL video output; Type II is >>> reserved for up to 1920x1080 RGB/TTL video output, on the basis that a Type >>> I 3.3mm card may fit into a Type II 5.0mm socket but not vice versa. Thus, a >>> module with a lower-capacity video output will physically be prevented from >>> being used with incompatible higher-resolution devices, preventing any >>> possible confusion about interoperability. >> >> type I 3.3mm no! that's wrong! well spotted. i believe i added >> that in a hurry without checking. > > It's worth pointing out that the specification on elinux.org is "is inconsistent." I was trying to say but apparently I just stopped typing. > > Under "Physical Dimensions" it says there are two valid sized, Type II > which is 5mm and Type III which is 8mm. > > Under "Requirements for RGB/TTL" it refers to 5mm and 3.3mm cards, but not > 8mm. > > http://elinux.org/Embedded_Open_Modular_Architecture/EOMA-68#Physical_Dimensions > > and > > http://elinux.org/Embedded_Open_Modular_Architecture/EOMA-68#Requirements_for_RGB.2FTTL > > Thought you should know :) ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] One issue with the EOMA68 Wikipedia
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 4:31 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > --- > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:20 PM, Mike Leimon wrote: >> Luke, >> >> I took a quick glance at the Wikipedia entry and saw what I thought was an >> error and I will fix the problem if you can confirm that I understand the >> situation correctly. >> >> The wikipedia article says the following: >> >> """ >> >> There are two different physical profiles of EOMA68 (based around the legacy >> PCMCIA classifications):[2] >> >> 54 mm × 85.6 mm; 5mm variant (Type II) >> 54 mm × 85.6 mm; 3.3mm variant (Type I) >> >> Type I is reserved for up to 1366x768 RGB/TTL video output; Type II is >> reserved for up to 1920x1080 RGB/TTL video output, on the basis that a Type >> I 3.3mm card may fit into a Type II 5.0mm socket but not vice versa. Thus, a >> module with a lower-capacity video output will physically be prevented from >> being used with incompatible higher-resolution devices, preventing any >> possible confusion about interoperability. > > type I 3.3mm no! that's wrong! well spotted. i believe i added > that in a hurry without checking. It's worth pointing out that the specification on elinux.org is Under "Physical Dimensions" it says there are two valid sized, Type II which is 5mm and Type III which is 8mm. Under "Requirements for RGB/TTL" it refers to 5mm and 3.3mm cards, but not 8mm. http://elinux.org/Embedded_Open_Modular_Architecture/EOMA-68#Physical_Dimensions and http://elinux.org/Embedded_Open_Modular_Architecture/EOMA-68#Requirements_for_RGB.2FTTL Thought you should know :) ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Future case idea: subnotebook/PDA with QWERTY keyboard
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Joseph Honold wrote: > On 09/02/2016 09:58 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >> well, do add the research that you've done to >> http://rhombus-tech.net/community_ideas/clamshell_microlaptop/ >> >> that's what the wiki is there for. at the same time can you please >> add mention of the SEW291 3G module, and that it's $12 in low volume, >> and that it uses an MSM6260 chipset. > > Will do. Really, I'm just trying to keep the *conversation* going and get > more input from others. > >> also, whilst initially it looks really great to add a $1 TI TCA8418 >> or other I2C chip, you soon find that you need another $1 chip, then >> another $1 ADC/DAC chip, then another $1 chip, and pretty soon it's >> like "hang on a minute this is f*g stupid, that's $5 worth of ICs >> to do the same job as a $1.50 STM32F072!" > > Good point. It all depends on what features get implemented in the handheld. > TCA8418 combined with STMPE811 touch controller/gpio expander seems like a > possible low cost option. Both have linux drivers so no need for custom > firmware. > >> also bear in mind that from experience with the HTC Universal >> reverse-engineering doing clamshell phone / pdas is f** >> complicated. beyond *any* shadow of doubt they are by far and above >> way more complex in terms of I/O than laptops, or even intel desktop >> PCs. > > Yeah, the mechanics of the hinge and getting cables from top to bottom would > be a pain. I'm leaning towards the candybar form factor to keep it less > complicated. > > My list of wanted features: > QWERTY Keypad with backlight > Wifi > Cellular (optional) > 640x480 or higher resolution LCD > Touchscreen (resistive) > Ambient Light Sensor (for backlight dimming) > USB Audio (headphone jack, internal mic, ear speaker for phone, loudspeaker) > USB Hub [wifi, audio, cellular, external host port(s)] > Camera (optional, USB) > Micro SD Slot You might be able to get a good head start by taking the GTA04 schematics (basis of Neo900) and looking at modifying them to accept an EOMA-68 computer card rather than having an onboard processor. The GTA04 is a fairly mature schematic, the latest revision GTA04A5 is going through the final stages before a production run. http://projects.goldelico.com/p/gta04-main/ ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] New Open Access Journal for Open Source Hardware
On 1 Sep 2016 3:45 p.m., "Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton" wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > wrote: > > > that's not very helpful, al. please don't use sarcasm on this list > > in a derogatory way, or distract me from fulfilling my promises. > > there are plenty of other lists where that behaviour is acceptable: > > this isn't one of them. > > > > just a couple of hours ago i sent a message explaining i am dealing > > with an enormous and completely overwhelming list of tasks in order to > > fulfil the promises and committments that have just been made to over > > 1,500 people. i don't appreciate having to deal with sarcastic > > remarks as a major distraction from any one of those tasks. > > > > i trust that that's really *really* clear. > > faaackin 'ellfire, that guy was scary. he emailed me off-list 10 > times in under 20 minutes. i had to block him so as to prevent > further net abuse. just wasted over half an hour dealing with his > demands instead of getting on with fulfilling the promises that i've > made to everyone else. I thought he was being sarcastic when he said time for a religious war. Sounds like he was serious lol. > > l. > > ___ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
