Hi
Since officially at the moment, Slackware ARM supports systems which have
an ARMv5t minimum CPU, I am thinking of changing the baseline target CPU
to be armv5t, rather than armv4t as it is at the moment.
The reasoning is that:
1. I don't think the ARMedslack user base is huge and
2. Of that
On 01/03/2011 02:06 PM, Stuart Winter wrote:
Since officially at the moment, Slackware ARM supports systems which have
an ARMv5t minimum CPU, I am thinking of changing the baseline target CPU
to be armv5t, rather than armv4t as it is at the moment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture
> This would block out that little Zipit Wireless Messenger.
It looks like Zipit uses an Xscale which is armv5, so it would work, as
far as I can tell.
--
Stuart Winter
Slackware ARM: www.armedslack.org
___
ARMedslack mailing list
ARMedslack@lists.ar
On 01/04/2011 06:50 AM, Stuart Winter wrote:
This would block out that little Zipit Wireless Messenger.
It looks like Zipit uses an Xscale which is armv5, so it would work, as
far as I can tell.
Zipit uses ARM720T (ARMv4T), the same as my GP2X primary processor (GP2X has a
940T co-processo
> > It looks like Zipit uses an Xscale which is armv5, so it would work, as
> > far as I can tell.
>
> Zipit uses ARM720T (ARMv4T), the same as my GP2X primary processor (GP2X has a
> 940T co-processor)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipit_Wireless_Messenger_%28Z2%29
So this must be a newer versi
On 01/04/2011 07:03 AM, Stuart Winter wrote:
It looks like Zipit uses an Xscale which is armv5, so it would work, as
far as I can tell.
Zipit uses ARM720T (ARMv4T), the same as my GP2X primary processor (GP2X has a
940T co-processor)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipit_Wireless_Messenger_%2
On Tue, 4 Jan 2011, John O'Donnell wrote:
> On 01/04/2011 07:03 AM, Stuart Winter wrote:
> >
> > > > It looks like Zipit uses an Xscale which is armv5, so it would work, as
> > > > far as I can tell.
> > >
> > > Zipit uses ARM720T (ARMv4T), the same as my GP2X primary processor (GP2X
> > > has a
On 01/04/2011 01:03 PM, Stuart Winter wrote:
Even this version with 32MB RAM isn't suitable. I don't even think
Slackware on x86 can really run reliably in 32MB of RAM.
So I'm not exactly concerned about this device :)
Hi,
Armed works fine on device with 32MB of RAM. Remember that the ne
On 01/04/2011 07:43 AM, Andrzej Telszewski wrote:
I like Armed and I like it running on my small device;) So if the gain from
changing from v4 to v5 isn't really worth, then I prefer it staying v4 (my
processor is arm920t).
What do you run it on and what do you run?
I loved my GP2X but I couldn
On 01/04/2011 02:04 PM, John O'Donnell wrote:
What do you run it on and what do you run?
I loved my GP2X but I couldnt conceive running armedslack. It was
extremely small and custom. Like alot of the HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players
I had seen back then.
Hi,
It's my prototyping board, you can find
What about Openmoko FreeRunner?
regards
giovanni
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Andrzej Telszewski wrote:
> On 01/04/2011 02:04 PM, John O'Donnell wrote:
>
>> What do you run it on and what do you run?
>> I loved my GP2X but I couldnt conceive running armedslack. It was
>> extremely small and
On 01/04/2011 08:38 AM, Giovanni wrote:
What about Openmoko FreeRunner?
regards
giovanni
Google is your friend
http://www.google.com/search?q=openmoko+freerunner+processor
* 400/500 MHz Samsung 2442B Processor/SOC (400 minimum, ARM920T core,
ARMv4T)
* Unbrickable dual Boot code in N
> Armed works fine on device with 32MB of RAM.
Heh. It's called "ARMedslack" or "Slackware ARM". Every time I see
"Armed" I get images of men in balaclavas committing a bank robbery ;-)
Yes 32MB will work for minimal services like dhcp, dns and stuff like
that, but IME not much else!
> I like
Am Tue, 4 Jan 2011 15:00:10 + (GMT)
schrieb Stuart Winter :
>
> > Armed works fine on device with 32MB of RAM.
>
> Heh. It's called "ARMedslack" or "Slackware ARM". Every time I see
> "Armed" I get images of men in balaclavas committing a bank
> robbery ;-)
>
> Yes 32MB will work for minim
14 matches
Mail list logo
