On 2020-04-16 18:35 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 04:15:00PM -0500, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> > It does seem strange to install the 'amd64' distro on my Intel Core
> > boxes. As I was aware of the history behind the name it made sense.
> > x86_64 is a bit more difficult to
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 04:15:00PM -0500, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> It does seem strange to install the 'amd64' distro on my Intel Core
> boxes. As I was aware of the history behind the name it made sense.
> x86_64 is a bit more difficult to type but seems less ambiguous. Oh
> well.
Too bad it has
On 2020-04-16 19:57 +0100, peter green wrote:
> Interestingly andriod seems to use arm64 for the "abi"* and
> aarch64 for the "instruction set"
I was hoping to avoid getting into all this because it's detail almost
no-one needs to care about, but there are indeed separate names for
the instructio
* On 2020 16 Apr 13:20 -0500, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> Besides there is i386 which intel retroactively called IA32, and then to
> confuse everyone decided IA64 was itanium, not the 64bit version of x86.
> Lots of people tried to install ia64 debian on 64 bit x86 machines
> over the years. Debian
On 16/04/2020 19:27, Wookey wrote:
Apologies for the confusion. I was rather hoping more projects would
use the obvious (and IMHO more user-friendly) arm64 name, rather than
following the corporate steer, and in the early days it was hard
to tell how this would go. But most have plumped for aarc
On 2020-04-16 19:43 +0200, deloptes wrote:
> So what can the community rule out here. Is it aarch64 and arm64 the same or
> not?
yes, arm64 and aarch64 are different names for the same architecture.
Linux (kernel) and debian/ubuntu (and Apple in IOS/LLVM) called it
arm64. ARM corp called it aar
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 07:58:29PM +0200, deloptes wrote:
> I think this is the answer
> https://wiki.debian.org/Arm64Port#Nomenclature_and_defines
>
> If your package does architecture-specific things explicitly then you will
> need to understand what names to use in tests.
>
> The gnu name for
deloptes wrote:
>
> So what can the community rule out here. Is it aarch64 and arm64 the same
> or not?
I think this is the answer
https://wiki.debian.org/Arm64Port#Nomenclature_and_defines
If your package does architecture-specific things explicitly then you will
need to understand what nam
Tixy wrote:
> Don't know what this has to do with Apple, unless it's an LLVM arch
> naming thing?
Yes LLVM.
I was planning to build our favorite desktop on arm64 for fun, but being
preoccupied now, could move forward, so this topic is intrigueing me as to
what architecture to start and build unde
On Thu, 2020-04-16 at 17:01 +0200, deloptes wrote:
> Tixy wrote:
>
> > AArch64 is the abbreviation used by ARM for their 64-bit ISA, and is
> > also used used by projects like GCC.
>
> I read this, but it said that the naming was merged to arm64 which initiated
> from Apple. I am confused, cause
On 16.04.20 16:49, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> For 5.5:
> That's possible. I did not check USB yet.
> And see the latest messages on
> https://github.com/lategoodbye/rpi-zero/issues/43 ...
Yes I have seen and only found CONFIG_USB_NET_CDCETHER in
config-5.5.0-1-arm64 so it seems not to be set or unsup
Tixy wrote:
> AArch64 is the abbreviation used by ARM for their 64-bit ISA, and is
> also used used by projects like GCC.
I read this, but it said that the naming was merged to arm64 which initiated
from Apple. I am confused, cause the article said you can use both in GCC
for same thing
Hi,
For 5.5:
That's possible. I did not check USB yet.
And see the latest messages on
https://github.com/lategoodbye/rpi-zero/issues/43 ...
For 5.6:
strange. I think it worked.
It would really be great to get a 5.6 kernel in experimental, from the
kernel team.
I'll try to refresh the status of
Hello Lucas,
thanks for the link. Build a image with kernel 5.5 boot the rpi4, but
USB is not working. lsusb show nothink. ( I know there is the Problem
with the pcie)
Build Image with Kernel 5.6 does nothing. No monitor output, no output
on serial.
When I try to upgrade the image with kernel 5.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:43:36PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>
>ACK.
>
>Building locally to test here...
And I have a build that looks OK by eye. Unfortunately, my local test
machine (Macchiatobin) seems to be dying and I can't test this
effectively now. :-(
It needs some tiny debian-cd change
15 matches
Mail list logo
