Re: mc Digest, Vol 107, Issue 3

2013-04-04 Thread Theodore Kilgore


On Wed, 3 Apr 2013, chris glur wrote:

 Thanks, I'll try SlakARM.

One or two things ought to be mentioned about this before you start, 
though:

First, it is not a distro which is specifically intended for the 
RPi. It is not specifically optimized for the RPi but is pretty generic 
for ARM hardware. One consequence of that is, the distro as far as I know 
does not provide a kernel which specifically supports that hardware, and 
therefore an attempt to boot one of the distro-provided kernels will not 
work. At least this was true when I did my install, which was several 
months ago. One had better use the stock Debian kernel and its associated 
modules.

Second, unless things have changed recently there is not full support for 
the RPi in Linus's git kernel, either, not to mention a numbered non-rc 
release. This may have changed recently. I have not kept current with that 
due to other stuff like working for a living. And naturally there is an 
ongoing effort to integrate the RPi fully into the main line, an effort 
which is (was?) still incomplete. Anyway, I did try to compile a git 
kernel back then and it would not run. 

Third, SlackARM runs quite well even as it is. But the RPi has some kind 
of math coprocessor, I understand. SlackARM's libc is set up only to use 
math mode emulation and so does not use the full abilities of that 
specific ARM cpu (reason: many ARM cpus will only use emulation and the 
distro is supposed to run on them. One of the good things to do is then, 
to use a libc which direcly supports using math mode. I did not go through 
the rather intricate steps to do this, but I am quite happy with the 
results even without that.

There are a couple of whinges and whines about the RPi which I fully agree 
with. One is that the USB support is just a little bit flaky. As you know, 
I have written some kernel stuff to support webcams. What I found out 
(after making sure that all of this stuff was implemented in my RPi 
kernel) is that there is a rather chaotic and semi-random pattern of 
cameras working, or not working. And sometimes it is cameras supported by 
the same kernel driver some of which work and some of which do not. I 
don't know why, because I have not had time to look into it deeply enough. 
Another whinge is that the sound chip works, but there is a really 
annoying loud pop when one plays a sound file, and another equally loud 
pop when the file comes to an end. Apparently, this happens because the 
sound chip is in standby mode by default and the first thing is it has to 
be turned full on, and then turned full off again. And I have not been 
able to figure out if there is any way to do a soft on and a soft off 
to fix that. At least, a first look at the kernel code did not seem to 
make it obvious what to do. Probably, if they had gone to the trouble to 
do something like to install a tiny buffer capacitor on the board it might 
be able to make this go away. But they didn't.

Also it is probably better to buy a new SD card to stick SlackArm on it 
instead of wiping the old one. Also as I said I think that Debian does 
have a functioning mc in its repository somewhere. 

Anyway, it's lots of fun for them that likes things like this.

Theodore Kilgore


 I've analysed why many people HATE mc.
 The sports-man/soldier-type who train to do the task by reflex,
 like your dog catches a ball, want to go-straight-to-the-goal,
 by writing a mesg to the-little-man-in-the-box.
 The don't want to see the 'clutter' of multiple fileNames and
 have to make decisions, during the game.
 They have a complete mental-model of how to reach the goal.
 
 On 4/2/13, Theodore Kilgore kilg...@banach.math.auburn.edu wrote:
 
 
  On Tue, 2 Apr 2013, chris glur wrote:
 
  Can someone confirm that mc is available for ARM:rPi ?
  I've often wondered why Debian doesn't acknowledge that
  gpm is the most essential utility and mc is the 2nd most.
 
  Hi, Chris,
 
  ArmedSlack (Slackware for ARM, aka Slackarm) does contain a package for
  mc. I can also confirm that, as of a couple of months ago,
  slackarm-current is running well enough on the RPi.
 
  In Debian, you might possibly be able to get mc by the routine of running
  sudo apt-get install mc. In fact, I think that I vaguely recall doing that
  successfully during my first attempt to get the RPi up and running, back
  when I first got one of them. As to why Debian seems to bypass mc as part
  of the basic distribution and seems to want to make people go and get it
  instead, I have no idea. I have often wondered about that obvious
  omission, myself.
 
  Theodore Kilgore
 
 
___
mc mailing list
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc


Re: stable vs. latest

2013-04-04 Thread Egmont Koblinger
Hi guys,

I notified the maintainer of distrowatch.org, asked him to update the
regexps that figure out the latest stable mc release.

He told me - and unfortunately I can only agree with him - that the wording
on MC's homepage is very confusing.  It mentions two releases, latest and
latest stable, people would obviously think that the latest refers to
unstable.  The comment that tries to clarify the situation is more
confusing rather than clarifying, how come you recommend not to use the
stable?

He insist - and again, I cannot disagree with it - that his page promotes
the latest *stable* of all software.  Given mc's new development model and
the wording used right now, he would stick with 4.8.1.7 forever.

Could you please reconsider the terminology, or the contents current
homepage?

E.g. you might begin to call the current releases 'stable', e.g. 4.8.8 is
the first stable of the 4.8.x series.

Or, you might want to remove the former stable 4.1.8.7 from the main
homepage and keep it only in the Downloads section.  Or something like
this...

Thanks a lot,
egmont



On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Felix Miata mrma...@earthlink.net wrote:

 On 2013-02-21 13:42 (GMT+0400) Andrew Borodin composed:


  On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 14:33:02 +0100 Egmont Koblinger wrote:


  Andrew:  Is it that soon there will be a 4.9.1.x stable and 4.9.x devel
 series?


  No, not soon. 4.8.x series is still continued. 4.9 should be well stable,
 without major and annoying defects and with some major features.


 Above response leaves me quite confused. :-(


  Or you give up this development model and stick to a single branch
 from now on?


  Yep.


 You mean eventually there will be only one version instead of two?


  If the latter, I think it should be made obvious on the
 homepage (maybe when 4.8.8 is released), and the Our release workflow
 page should also be updated.


  Yes, certainly.


 My original thread starter question hasn't really been answered yet. Who
 is the 4.8.1.x branch for, since it seems major distro's latest releases
 are using 4.8.x, with openSUSE that doesn't even release using latest in
 4.8.1.x line the only exception I'm aware of?

 --
 The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
 words are persuasive. Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

 Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
 __**_
 mc-devel mailing list
 https://mail.gnome.org/**mailman/listinfo/mc-develhttps://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel

___
mc-devel mailing list
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel