How to use the HDMI screen as console on Cubox-i4
Hi Debian Arm folks! Does anyone know the necessary magic incantation to make my Cubox-i 4x4 use the HDMI port as console so I can run a desktop environment on it? Thanks! Rick
Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:39:46PM +, Niels Thykier wrote: >Steve McIntyre: >> [...] > - armel has a RT concern about lack of buildds (only 2) > I think this is outdated, my understanding is that armel and armhf are now using a shared buildd pool. I see arnold, hoiby, henze, hasse, antheil and hartmann recently active on the armel buildd page and the same on the armhf page. >>> >>> Ok, so a total of 6 shared between the two architectures? >> >> Correct. We'll also have the possibility of arm64 machines building >> armhf at some point - arm64 server machines are starting to appear and >> are much better designed for this kind of workload. > >Ok. I have re-shuffled the buildds so there are now 3 for each port and >removed the RM concern for now. Thanks. >I am hoping DSA will follow up on the remote power and the management >concerns. There is a PDU in place in the rack at ARM, but those Marvell buildds need a button push to power up which makes it kind of moot for *those* machines. Then again, in all the time we've been using those machines I don't think it's actually ever been an issue yet. Other machines there are remote powerable. All the arm64 boxes are remote powerable (in ARM and Linaro's Austin colo). As we add more of these boxes, I expect to get more remote management too. On the "multiple concerns (strong)" thing, I quote: 2016-06-06 15:33 BST<@zumbi> Sledge_: tbh, dsa have not updated arch qualification status, it is outdated from past release I don't see any showstoppers here for the ARM ports. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com < liw> everything I know about UK hotels I learned from "Fawlty Towers"
Re: kexec-tools installs on arm64
On 13/06/16 14:49, Phil Endecott wrote: Dear All, I was surprised to find that "apt-get install kexec-tools" succeeds on an arm64 system - it installs the armhf version. It then fails to run, with an "Unsupported machine type" error. Is this an error in the multiarch tagging for the kexec-tools package? I would class it as a design limitation of multiarch. apt has no way of knowing if a particular foreign-architecture package will actually be useful. Only what dependencies it will satisfy and whether versions for multiple architectures can be co-installed.
Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification
Steve McIntyre: > [...] - armel has a RT concern about lack of buildds (only 2) >>> I think this is outdated, my understanding is that armel and armhf are >>> now using a shared buildd pool. I see arnold, hoiby, henze, hasse, >>> antheil and hartmann recently active on the armel buildd page and the >>> same on the armhf page. >> >> Ok, so a total of 6 shared between the two architectures? > > Correct. We'll also have the possibility of arm64 machines building > armhf at some point - arm64 server machines are starting to appear and > are much better designed for this kind of workload. > Ok. I have re-shuffled the buildds so there are now 3 for each port and removed the RM concern for now. I am hoping DSA will follow up on the remote power and the management concerns. Thanks, ~Niels signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification
Philipp Kern: > On 2016-06-05 12:01, Niels Thykier wrote: >> * amd64, i386, armel, armhf, arm64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, >>s390x >>- *No* blockers at this time from RT, DSA nor security. >>- s390, ppc64el and all arm ports have DSA concerns. > > What is the current DSA concern about s390x? > > Kind regards and thanks > Philipp Kern > The concern listed as: "rely on sponsors for hardware (mild concern)" As I recall the argument went something along the lines of: "Debian cannot replace the hardware; if any of the machines dies, we need a sponsor to replace it. If all of them dies and we cannot get sponsored replacements, we cannot support the architecture any longer" (My wording) Thanks, ~Niels signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
kexec-tools installs on arm64
Dear All, I was surprised to find that "apt-get install kexec-tools" succeeds on an arm64 system - it installs the armhf version. It then fails to run, with an "Unsupported machine type" error. Is this an error in the multiarch tagging for the kexec-tools package? Cheers, Phil.
