Hi Folks,
I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
official rPi builds but that doesn't mean I'm not interested to know
whether we should put testing effort into Kirkwood for F18.
My thought is
On 10/06/2012 10:43 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
Hi Folks,
I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
official rPi builds but that doesn't mean I'm not interested to know
whether we should put testing
Hi Gordan,
On 10/06/2012 05:58 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 10/06/2012 10:43 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
>> it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
>> official rPi builds but that
Jon Masters wrote:
Hi Folks,
I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
it went away.
Just to get a rough gauge of interest, perhaps we should look at the
download stats for the F17 images. That won't tell us the
number of actual 'users', but will at least give
On 10/06/2012 11:07 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
Hi Gordan,
On 10/06/2012 05:58 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
On 10/06/2012 10:43 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
Hi Folks,
I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in th
> I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
> it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
> official rPi builds but that doesn't mean I'm not interested to know
> whether we should put testing effort into Kirkwood for F18.
>
I'm using Kirk
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
> it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
> official rPi builds but that doesn't mean I'm not interested to know
> whether we
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 10/06/2012 10:43 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
>>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
>> it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
>> official rPi builds but that
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
> Hi Gordan,
>
> On 10/06/2012 05:58 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>> On 10/06/2012 10:43 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>> I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
>>> it went away. For now, we won't kill off A
>> That /may/ be true. Maybe. I don't know that for sure. They certainly
>> were popular amongst a certain crowd. I would say the most popular board
>> these days is likely the rPi, followed by some of the new v7 devices,
>> especially the cheaper rPi-inspired AllWinner based stuff, which we
>> pro
> I'm using Kirkwood, with a couple of Dreamplugs. I've been working to get
> F17 and/or F18 to work on it (it turns out the Dreamplug doesn't have NAND
> and the orion_nand kernel module was hanging).
Works if you blacklist the module.
>> My thought is that the latest plugs are moving to ARMv7,
On 10/06/2012 09:50 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
>> I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
>> it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
>> official rPi builds but that doesn't mean I'
On 06/10/2012 15:02, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
On 10/06/2012 10:43 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
Hi Folks,
I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
On 06/10/2012 15:11, Peter Robinson wrote:
That /may/ be true. Maybe. I don't know that for sure. They certainly
were popular amongst a certain crowd. I would say the most popular board
these days is likely the rPi, followed by some of the new v7 devices,
especially the cheaper rPi-inspired AllWi
On 10/06/2012 06:50 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
Of course none of this is set in stone, it's a discussion and just me
putting my ideas into words.
FWIW, I likewise think we should shoot for promotion of armv7hl to
primary, leaving armv5 (or armv6) secondary. Numerous packages with
atomics issu
Hi,
On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 05:43:33AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
> it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
> official rPi builds but that doesn't mean I'm not interested to know
> whether we
On 10/08/2012 02:35 PM, Till Maas wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 05:43:33AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
official rPi builds but that doesn't mean I'
On 10/08/2012 02:53 PM, Scott Sullivan wrote:
On 10/08/2012 02:35 PM, Till Maas wrote:
[...]
It also includes instructions to update the boot loader and supports
installing on USB, SD card and eSATA. The Fedora instructions only
mention to dd an image on a SD card on the other hand.
You'll no
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 02:53:45PM -0400, Scott Sullivan wrote:
> On 10/08/2012 02:35 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 05:43:33AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> >
> >>I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
> >>it went away. For now, we won't ki
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 02:53:45PM -0400, Scott Sullivan wrote:
>> On 10/08/2012 02:35 PM, Till Maas wrote:
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 05:43:33AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
>> >
>> >>I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
El Tue, 9 Oct 2012 08:54:26 +0100
Peter Robinson escribió:
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Till Maas
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 02:53:45PM -0400, Scott Sullivan wrote:
> >> On 10/08/2012 02:35 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> >> >Hi,
> >> >
> >> >
Jon,
Jon Masters writes:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
> it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
> official rPi builds but that doesn't mean I'm not interested to know
> whether we should put testing effort
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Jon,
>
> Jon Masters writes:
>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
>> it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
>> official rPi builds but that doesn't mean I
On 10/09/2012 10:36 AM, Derek Atkins wrote:
I know that RPi looks interesting, but they are still very hard to
acquire. (Limit 1, then wait a few months??)
That Limit went away in July and it's now down semi-normal lead times
instead of months.
http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/1588
--
S
On 10/09/2012 03:48 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
The x86 port still supports a Pentium, I don't see any reason to drop
support for kirkwood. Is it really that much extra effort?
It is surprisingly quite a lot of effort.
Fedora no longer supports Pentium actually. It was dropped some time
ago (a
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 10/09/2012 03:48 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>
>>> The x86 port still supports a Pentium, I don't see any reason to drop
>>> support for kirkwood. Is it really that much extra effort?
>>
>>
>> It is surprisingly quite a lot of effort.
>>
>> F
On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:54:26AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 02:53:45PM -0400, Scott Sullivan wrote:
> >> On 10/08/2012 02:35 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> Well you could always step up to help improve that documentation
On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 04:30:24AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> El Tue, 9 Oct 2012 08:54:26 +0100
> Peter Robinson escribió:
> > On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Till Maas
> > wrote:
> > > It seems that the disk image boots on the dockstar, but a first "yum
> > > update" got oom-killed and the
Peter Robinson writes:
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
>> Jon,
>>
>> Jon Masters writes:
>>
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>> I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
>>> it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
>>> officia
Peter Robinson writes:
>> Might as well wait until the whole 32-bit branch can be dropped. Practically
>> all x86 CPU made in most of the past decade is x86-64.
>
> Half decade maybe as Intel first introduced 64 bit CPUs in early 2005
> and it took a while to spread through their product set, and
On 10/10/2012 10:47 AM, Derek Atkins wrote:
Sure, but we're a decade later. Kirkwood devices were just released
what? 3 years ago? I certainly got mine more recently than that. I
admit I've been running F12 on it, but that's only because there hadn't
been another fedora release until F17.
T
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Peter Robinson writes:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
>>> Jon,
>>>
>>> Jon Masters writes:
>>>
Hi Folks,
I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
it went away. For
On 10/10/2012 05:55 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
Hi Folks,
I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in the
official rPi builds but that doesn't mean I'm not interested to know
whether we should put testin
On 10/10/2012 06:47 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
Peter Robinson writes:
Might as well wait until the whole 32-bit branch can be dropped. Practically
all x86 CPU made in most of the past decade is x86-64.
Half decade maybe as Intel first introduced 64 bit CPUs in early 2005
and it took a while to
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 10/10/2012 05:55 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
> it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used in
> the
> offici
On 10/11/2012 10:51 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
On 10/10/2012 05:55 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
Hi Folks,
I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood, and who would miss it if
it went away. For now, we won't kill off ARMv5 because it is used i
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 10/11/2012 10:51 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/10/2012 05:55 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>> I'm interested to know who is using Kirkwood,
On 10/10/2012 09:46 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
I know that RPi looks interesting, but they are still very hard to
acquire. (Limit 1, then wait a few months??)
That's no longer the case. In most cases I believe it should now be
relatively instant shipping and they're certainly no longer limited
On 10/10/2012 07:59 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On 10/10/2012 10:47 AM, Derek Atkins wrote:
Sure, but we're a decade later. Kirkwood devices were just released
what? 3 years ago? I certainly got mine more recently than that. I
admit I've been running F12 on it, but that's only because there hadn'
On 10/11/2012 11:03 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
The x86 port still supports a Pentium, I don't see any reason to drop
support for kirkwood. Is it really that much extra effort?
It is surprisingly quite a lot of effort.
Oh? Could you elaborate on that? What "quite a lot of effort" does i
Gordan Bobic writes:
>>> So what you're saying is that Fedora *still* supports an x32 CPU that
>>> was released well over a decade ago...
>>
>> No. The XO-1 was released in 2007. That's half a decade ago. Given the
>> project came out of MIT and you have a @mit.edu address I would hope
>> you wou
On 10/11/2012 03:10 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
Just out of interest, which packages are you referring to? I am assuming
it is LibreOffice + a small subset of whatever is in Fedora that isn't
in EL; mainly because I had no RAM/swap/CPU issues building any the 2000
or so packages that overlap. Takes a
On 10/11/2012 08:03 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On 10/11/2012 03:10 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
Just out of interest, which packages are you referring to? I am assuming
it is LibreOffice + a small subset of whatever is in Fedora that isn't
in EL; mainly because I had no RAM/swap/CPU issues building a
On 10/11/2012 08:03 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On 10/11/2012 03:10 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
Just out of interest, which packages are you referring to? I am assuming
it is LibreOffice + a small subset of whatever is in Fedora that isn't
in EL; mainly because I had no RAM/swap/CPU issues building a
On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 09:40 +0100, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>
> I use iSCSI (ext4 build area on one of the hosts for the packages that
> fail self-tests on NFS) and NFS (for everything else) backed by a
> reasonably beefy storage box.
Why no just iSCSI ? I am guessing you have some numbers to co
On 10/12/2012 09:55 AM, Yanko Kaneti wrote:
On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 09:40 +0100, Gordan Bobic wrote:
I use iSCSI (ext4 build area on one of the hosts for the packages that
fail self-tests on NFS) and NFS (for everything else) backed by a
reasonably beefy storage box.
Why no just iSCSI ? I a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 09:40:13 +0100
Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 10/11/2012 08:03 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> > On 10/11/2012 03:10 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> >> Just out of interest, which packages are you referring to? I am
> >> assuming it is LibreOffi
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 09:46:37PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> Marvell? Asking who in particular? And what configuration. There's a
> lot of kirkwood chips with 128Mb or less RAM which makes it a little
> pointless for a Fedora image and hence IMO not relevant.
A Seagate dockstar has only 128M
Hi,
Brendan Conoboy writes:
> On 10/11/2012 03:10 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>> Just out of interest, which packages are you referring to? I am assuming
>> it is LibreOffice + a small subset of whatever is in Fedora that isn't
>> in EL; mainly because I had no RAM/swap/CPU issues building any the 2
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 01:37:51PM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Brendan Conoboy writes:
> Personally I'd be fine if we consider Kirkwood to be "server only"
> (i.e. "headless"). So to me that implies that a lack of Libreoffice is
> "okay". Granted, I don't know if that's okay from a Fedora sta
On Friday, October 12, 2012, 1:51:43 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 01:37:51PM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
>> Brendan Conoboy writes:
>> Personally I'd be fine if we consider Kirkwood to be "server only"
>> (i.e. "headless"). So to me that implies that a lack of Libreoffice is
>> "
On 12/10/2012 18:51, Till Maas wrote:
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 01:37:51PM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
Brendan Conoboy writes:
Personally I'd be fine if we consider Kirkwood to be "server only"
(i.e. "headless"). So to me that implies that a lack of Libreoffice is
"okay". Granted, I don't kn
52 matches
Mail list logo
