Hi Roger!
On 07/23/2018 10:42 AM, Roger Shimizu wrote:
> I talked to a few people about keeping armel in buster, during 1st and
> 2nd day in debcamp.
> Seems the blocker is just the buildd server hardware, and memory size it has.
According to my colleague Alex Graf at SUSE, you can definitely
Dear armel/armhf shakeholders,
I talked to a few people about keeping armel in buster, during 1st and
2nd day in debcamp.
Seems the blocker is just the buildd server hardware, and memory size it has.
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 7:04 PM, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
>
> Quoting Uwe Kleine-König :
>>
>>
> On Jun 29, 2018, at 9:50 AM, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 11:04:26PM +0900, Roger Shimizu wrote:
>> I see armel is already not a candidate for buster [0].
>> So it seems we can discuss armhf, but no armel at all.
>> I don't agree with this idea.
>> And I think we
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 11:04:26PM +0900, Roger Shimizu wrote:
> I see armel is already not a candidate for buster [0].
> So it seems we can discuss armhf, but no armel at all.
> I don't agree with this idea.
> And I think we should treat armel and armhf equally.
Please review the mail which
Open Network Linux developed for the Open Compute Project has a vested
interest in maintaining support for armel at least. I would be interested
in sponsoring or donating rack mountable switches using armel processors.
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 3:04 AM, W. Martin Borgert
wrote:
> Quoting Uwe
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 10:04 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> Hello Julien,
>
> On 06/29/2018 11:23 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
>>> If the concerns are mostly about the hardware not being rackable, there
>>> is a rackable NAS by Netgear:
>>>
>>>
>>>
Hello Julien,
On 06/29/2018 11:23 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> If the concerns are mostly about the hardware not being rackable, there
>> is a rackable NAS by Netgear:
>>
>>
>> https://www.netgear.com/business/products/storage/readynas/RN2120.aspx#tab-techspecs
>>
>> with an armhf cpu. Not
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 12:06 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
> On 06/29/2018 10:41 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> wrote:
>>
In short, the hardware (development boards) we're currently using to
build armel and armhf
On 06/29/2018 10:41 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
> wrote:
>
>>> In short, the hardware (development boards) we're currently using to
>>> build armel and armhf packages aren't up to our standards, and we
>>> really, really want them
Quoting Uwe Kleine-König :
If the concerns are mostly about the hardware not being rackable, there
is a rackable NAS by Netgear:
https://www.netgear.com/business/products/storage/readynas/RN2120.aspx#tab-techspecs
This seems to be out of stock and discontinued, unfortunately.
[s/debian-ports/debian-arm/]
On 06/29/2018 09:16 AM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 08:03:00PM +, Niels Thykier wrote:
>> armel/armhf:
>>
>>
>> * Undesirable to keep the hardware running beyond 2020. armhf VM
>>support uncertain. (DSA)
>>-
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 08:03:00PM +, Niels Thykier wrote:
>> armel/armhf:
>>
>>
>> * Undesirable to keep the hardware running beyond 2020. armhf VM
>>support uncertain. (DSA)
>>- Source: [DSA
Hello,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 08:03:00PM +, Niels Thykier wrote:
> armel/armhf:
>
>
> * Undesirable to keep the hardware running beyond 2020. armhf VM
>support uncertain. (DSA)
>- Source: [DSA Sprint report]
>
> [DSA Sprint report]:
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
