Hi,
I should work on kernel rpm for my bachelor thesis. I plan to get
dreamplug and make kernel rpm for kirkwood processors. After that i
can work on other devices.
Peter
On 29 March 2011 21:26, wrote:
>
> Quoting Gordan Bobic :
>
> > omall...@msu.edu wrote:
> >> Quoting Gordan Bobic :
> >>
>
On 29 March 2011 07:15, Jon Masters wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 21:10 +, Matthew Wilson wrote:
>> It's probably worth gathering some data on h/w and experiences as the
>> beta progresses. Any objections to my creating a wiki page to track
>> and summarise this?
>
> That sounds like a great
Quoting Gordan Bobic :
> omall...@msu.edu wrote:
>> Quoting Gordan Bobic :
>>
>>> It'd have to be more finely grained than sub-architecture since a kernel
>>> for one target won't necessarily work on other CPU of the same
>>> sub-architecture (e.g. a Kirkwood kernel won't work on all ARMv5
>>> pro
On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 12:03 -0400, omall...@msu.edu wrote:
> Quoting Gordan Bobic :
>
> > It'd have to be more finely grained than sub-architecture since a kernel
> > for one target won't necessarily work on other CPU of the same
> > sub-architecture (e.g. a Kirkwood kernel won't work on all ARMv5
On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 10:45 -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Gordan Bobic writes:
>
> > Jon Masters wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 21:10 +, Matthew Wilson wrote:
> >>
> >>> 2. Armv7 / VFP / NEON support to squeeze a bit more performance out
> >>> (where appropriate to the h/w).
> >>
> >> FWI
omall...@msu.edu wrote:
> Quoting Gordan Bobic :
>
>> It'd have to be more finely grained than sub-architecture since a kernel
>> for one target won't necessarily work on other CPU of the same
>> sub-architecture (e.g. a Kirkwood kernel won't work on all ARMv5
>> processors).
>
> Is there a way a
Quoting Gordan Bobic :
> It'd have to be more finely grained than sub-architecture since a kernel
> for one target won't necessarily work on other CPU of the same
> sub-architecture (e.g. a Kirkwood kernel won't work on all ARMv5
> processors).
Is there a way around this? I mean like being able t
It'd have to be more finely grained than sub-architecture since a kernel
for one target won't necessarily work on other CPU of the same
sub-architecture (e.g. a Kirkwood kernel won't work on all ARMv5
processors).
I am still assuming the split is going to be between softfp and hardfp
(ABI), ra
So is the idea is to have kernel rpm for each sub-architecture. ARMv5,
ARMv7, ARMv9?
What about the user-land? Would we keep seperate repos to have optimized
bits for v7/9?
On Mar 29, 2011 9:49 AM, "Gordan Bobic" wrote:
> Derek Atkins wrote:
>> Jon Masters writes:
>>
>>> On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 2
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 21:10 +, Matthew Wilson wrote:
>
> > 3. Some kernel build strategy.
>
> There are a couple of us looking into this at the moment. The thinking
> (thus far, only really started pondering recently) goes that we need a
>
Jon Masters wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 10:45 -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
>> Gordan Bobic writes:
>>
>>> Jon Masters wrote:
On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 21:10 +, Matthew Wilson wrote:
> 2. Armv7 / VFP / NEON support to squeeze a bit more performance out
> (where appropriate to the
On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 10:45 -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Gordan Bobic writes:
>
> > Jon Masters wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 21:10 +, Matthew Wilson wrote:
> >>
> >>> 2. Armv7 / VFP / NEON support to squeeze a bit more performance out
> >>> (where appropriate to the h/w).
> >>
> >> FWI
Derek Atkins wrote:
> Jon Masters writes:
>
>> On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 21:10 +, Matthew Wilson wrote:
>>
>>> 3. Some kernel build strategy.
>> There are a couple of us looking into this at the moment. The thinking
>> (thus far, only really started pondering recently) goes that we need a
>> kern
Gordan Bobic writes:
> Jon Masters wrote:
>> On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 21:10 +, Matthew Wilson wrote:
>>
>>> 2. Armv7 / VFP / NEON support to squeeze a bit more performance out
>>> (where appropriate to the h/w).
>>
>> FWIW, I think (eventually), moving to an ARMv7 base has a lot of
>> benefit,
Jon Masters writes:
> On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 21:10 +, Matthew Wilson wrote:
>
>> 3. Some kernel build strategy.
>
> There are a couple of us looking into this at the moment. The thinking
> (thus far, only really started pondering recently) goes that we need a
> kernel RPM but using the F13 ker
Jon Masters wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 21:10 +, Matthew Wilson wrote:
>
>> 2. Armv7 / VFP / NEON support to squeeze a bit more performance out
>> (where appropriate to the h/w).
>
> FWIW, I think (eventually), moving to an ARMv7 base has a lot of
> benefit, with not a (lot) of drawback. A
16 matches
Mail list logo
