Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

2017-08-08 12:11 GMT+02:00 Pablo Rath : > On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 10:17:22AM +0200, mike.v...@gmail.com wrote: >> Well they've announced the CHIP to be more open and supported than >> actually delivered. >> >> Now that is unfortunately common practice. And due to experiences

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 10:17:22AM +0200, mike.v...@gmail.com wrote: > Well they've announced the CHIP to be more open and supported than > actually delivered. > > Now that is unfortunately common practice. And due to experiences in > the past, Poulsbo, Andriod, I already knew that they would not

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Pablo Rath wrote: > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 11:08:16AM -0400, do...@mail.com wrote: >> I asked in to forums about how to solve this and it's been weeks without >>

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 11:08:16AM -0400, do...@mail.com wrote: > On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:10:21 +0200 > Pablo Rath wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 06:19:29PM -0400, David Niklas wrote: > > > On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 13:21:56 +0200 > > > > > > Actually, my PC has a kernel fault

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:10:21 +0200 Pablo Rath wrote: > On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 06:19:29PM -0400, David Niklas wrote: > > On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 13:21:56 +0200 > > > > Actually, my PC has a kernel fault > > It took me a moment to guess that you abbreviate PocketChip as "PC".

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 06:34:39AM -0400, Jean Flamelle wrote: > Actually learned about the > deblob scripts seeing a script use them on the chrome kernel, so I was > thinking about running deblob in a u-boot directory and seeing what > happens. My guess is that nothing useful is going to happen

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 06:01:42PM -0500, Isaac David wrote: > Pablo : > >There is a deblob script used by Parabola Linux to liberate a mainline > >kernel. It is used to > >create a libre-linux kernel from mainline. > > just chiming in to clarify that Parabola actually uses

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On 7/6/17, Pablo wrote: > This is a quite late reply to some Emails on this list from May. I took some > time to research and test. > John, do you still work on liberating Pocketchip? Got distracted trying to install parabola on an asus c201 (nothing can write a sane gpt

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

Pablo : Probably a good idea to use mainline libre-linux, but first want to make a diff file comparing their fork with libre to make sure their aren't any drivers which are libre that we might need (or any bug-fixes). There is a deblob script used by Parabola Linux to

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 8:29 PM, David Niklas wrote: > I'm shocked. yehh don't be - that's people for you. > I've met so many nice people, like you, working on FLOSS projects... > Just out of

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Tue, 30 May 2017 03:36:24 +0100 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > --- > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 10:48 PM, David Niklas wrote: > > > I am just a tad confused. > > 1. You started

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Tue, 30 May 2017 03:27:19 +0100 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 10:37 PM, David Niklas wrote: > > > Prior to purchasing the Pocket CHIP I read their docs and kickstarter > > page. See this (their kickstarter page says similar): > >

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

2017-05-29 23:37 GMT+02:00 David Niklas : > On Mon, 08 May 2017 09:59:50 +0100 > "mike.v...@gmail.com" wrote: > > 2017-05-08 3:34 GMT+02:00 : > > Sorry, I (foolishly) though that ARMv7 == A7 (i.e. a contraction). > Don't worry that is common

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 10:48 PM, David Niklas wrote: > I am just a tad confused. > 1. You started a reverse engineering project on NT domains. > 2. You presented your success to MS as a security

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 10:37 PM, David Niklas wrote: > Prior to purchasing the Pocket CHIP I read their docs and kickstarter > page. See this (their kickstarter page says similar): > https://docs.getchip.com/chip.html#is-chip-open-source-where-are-the-docs > Are they flat out

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Mon, 08 May 2017 09:59:50 +0100 "mike.v...@gmail.com" wrote: > 2017-05-08 3:34 GMT+02:00 : > > > I apologize for DOS'ing the list, I can only get online about once a > > week. > > > > On Thu, 4 May 2017 17:13:23 +0200 > > "mike.v...@gmail.com"

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Mon, 8 May 2017 16:38:22 +0100 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 4:23 PM, wrote: > > > Is it common to do something like this against a person? > > in the unethical business world? of course it is! mostly you don't >

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On 5/12/17, Louis Pearson wrote: > I don't know if you know about this or not, but there is a community > wiki at http://www.chip-community.org/index.php/Main_Page > It has examples on using buildroot to flash images to chip >

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

I don't know if you know about this or not, but there is a community wiki at http://www.chip-community.org/index.php/Main_Page It has examples on using buildroot to flash images to chip http://www.chip-community.org/index.php/Flashing_Buildroot_Image_from_Ubuntu Again, I'm clueless :P I have just

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

> Ah, interesting. Thank you for the correction and additional input. > I would be glad to be wrong here as it makes things so much easier. > My knowledge is quite vague in this area and comes mainly from > NextThings user forum. For example consider the following threads: If you want sound

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 05:05:20PM +0200, mike.v...@gmail.com wrote: > 2017-05-10 16:38 GMT+02:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton : > > > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Pablo wrote: > > > > > With any non-Chip-kernel you will lose NAND support. > > > So you can

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

2017-05-10 16:38 GMT+02:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton : > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Pablo wrote: > > > With any non-Chip-kernel you will lose NAND support. > > So you can either: > > a)patch your libre kernel > > or > > b) ignore NAND and use flash

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Pablo wrote: > With any non-Chip-kernel you will lose NAND support. > So you can either: > a)patch your libre kernel > or > b) ignore NAND and use flash memory via usb port. > > For b) you will need mainline U-Boot because NextThings U-Boot

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

> >>On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 12:00 AM, John Luke Gibson > >>eaterjo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Right now I'm looking at CHIP-buildroot. > >> I'm planning on patching out any blobs and also anything not CHIP > >> related (as we don't want a person to accidentally think the script > >> will give them

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 05:06:17PM -0700, Jeffrey Sites wrote: > > > > On May 9, 2017, at 16:00, John Luke Gibson wrote: > > > > Right now I'm looking at CHIP-buildroot. > > I'm planning on patching out any blobs and also anything not CHIP > > related (as we don't want a

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

John Luke Gibson writes: > On 5/9/17, Benson Mitchell wrote: >> Seems like you're confusing back-quote (`) with single-quote ('), maybe? >> > I just want to say that alone makes for pretty terrible design within > a fundamental

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

Free Software Foundation Latin America Linux-Libre. On 10 May 2017 09:40:02 GMT+03:00, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >--- >crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > >On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 12:00 AM, John Luke Gibson

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 12:00 AM, John Luke Gibson wrote: > Right now I'm looking at CHIP-buildroot. > I'm planning on patching out any blobs and also anything not CHIP > related (as we don't want

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On 5/9/17, Benson Mitchell wrote: > Seems like you're confusing back-quote (`) with single-quote ('), maybe? > I just want to say that alone makes for pretty terrible design within a fundamental language which an entire os can't run without.

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On 5/9/17, Benson Mitchell wrote: > On May 9, 2017 7:02 PM, "John Luke Gibson" wrote: > > Like, the first file initiated by the main make file is > support/setlocalversion which looks to just check a whole bunch of > un-special

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

--- jasites > On May 9, 2017, at 16:00, John Luke Gibson wrote: > >> On 5/8/17, Pablo wrote: >> On Sun, May 07, 2017 at 04:36:40PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton >> wrote: >>> On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Pablo wrote:

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On May 9, 2017 7:02 PM, "John Luke Gibson" wrote: Like, the first file initiated by the main make file is support/setlocalversion which looks to just check a whole bunch of un-special variables which weren't set in the make script and had no opportunity to be set by any

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 10:36:28AM +0200, mike.v...@gmail.com wrote: > Their website is hardly obvious to the software needs of running their > hardware. > > How hard can it be > > "To use our hardware you have two options: Our BSP which has closed source > drivers, but you have full

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Sun, May 07, 2017 at 04:36:40PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Pablo wrote: > > > To flash your deblobbed image beware of the closed-source flashing tool for > > the Chrome browser and use the strange “Ubuntu virtual machine

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 4:23 PM, wrote: > Is it common to do something like this against a person? in the unethical business world? of course it is! mostly you don't get to hear about it, but software libre developers are different. they're not beholden to anyone,

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

Don't top post please 2017-05-08 17:23 GMT+02:00 : > Original Message > From: Bill Kontos > > > Verhaegen is one of those selected individuals who had the luxury of > getting all the shit of the world thrown at their face for

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

Is it common to do something like this against a person? Original Message From: Bill Kontos <vkontog...@gmail.com> Apparently from: arm-netbook-boun...@lists.phcomp.co.uk To: Linux on small ARM machines <arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

Verhaegen is one of those selected individuals who had the luxury of getting all the shit of the world thrown at their face for trying to do the right thing. He was one of the leaders in pushing amd into mainlining gpu drivers( which they have been successful to and keep working on) and got shit

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

> > The R8 is a rebranded A13. > What? I own one of those and I'm almost certain that the CPU is an A7. > Let's boot the PocketCHIP up... > The processor is detected as an A7. > I'll attach the output, it would probably be interesting to see all of > it... > Done, it's compressed bzip2 since it's

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 2:34 AM, wrote: > You're not giving us enough details. Who is Verhaegen? What did he burn > out on? http://libv.livejournal.com/ the fact that he's not under NDA has led to large corporations - including ARM - to enact slander campaigns against him,

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On 5/4/17, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > --- > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 4:13 PM, mike.v...@gmail.com > wrote: > >> That is apparently a Allwinner R8 pared with an external

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 4:13 PM, mike.v...@gmail.com wrote: > That is apparently a Allwinner R8 pared with an external rtl8723bs Wifi/BT > chip. > > The R8 is a rebranded A13. > > If you look at >

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

2017-05-04 9:04 GMT+02:00 John Luke Gibson : > Since it seems like a trivially simple task that for some reason no > one has taken up, I would like to take the opportunity to exercise a > learning experience and simultaneously benefit the community, by > liberating

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On Thu May 4 12:05:48 BST 2017, John Luke Gibson wrote: > Gosh, I feel like this is just more mainline stuff that would be > parsed out, because there must be more than a hundred drivers with > everything from intel to yamaha. Yes, you need to look at the configuration file for the kernel to

Re: [Arm-netbook] Side-Topic: Liberating PocketCHIP

On 5/4/17, Bill Kontos wrote: > Why is there an intel blob on the chip. I didn't know there was intel ip in > there. > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:04 AM, John Luke Gibson > wrote: > >> Since it seems like a trivially simple task that for some reason no