On 28/10/21 11:58, Oregano wrote:
PS. Sadly, your personal site/blog times out, and requires retries to
eventually appear.
It took me one re-try, which isn't unusual
I must find where to change firefox setting to delay time-out
--
All the best
Keith Bainbridge
keithrbaugro...@gmail.com
September 14, 2021 9:00 PM, "Gunnar Wolf" wrote:
>
> Yup - For full disclosure of something that has not yet happened, I
> recently talked with Steve McIntyre, and in the next few days I'll
> start looking into enabling the move to cdimage.debian.org. So, yay! \o/
It must have happened (I saw
On Wednesday 22 September 2021 17:56:18 Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 04:52:15PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > bookmarked, that will take some study to grok how that works. Is
> > there a minimum kernel version?
>
> It appears it has been around for many years. Of course
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 04:52:15PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> bookmarked, that will take some study to grok how that works. Is there a
> minimum kernel version?
It appears it has been around for many years. Of course features have
been added over time.
--
Len Sorensen
On Tuesday 21 September 2021 14:43:57 Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 11:36:51AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Humph, idea borrowed from the Z-80 of the very late 70's, or
> > possibly from the TI 9900's, which had no registers, all in memory
> > and it changed context by
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 11:36:51AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> Humph, idea borrowed from the Z-80 of the very late 70's, or possibly
> from the TI 9900's, which had no registers, all in memory and it changed
> context by resetting the index counter to a different address for a new
> set of
On Tuesday 21 September 2021 07:59:42 Lennart Sorensen wrote:
I'm subbed, no need to CC: me.
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 05:00:12AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > No, in fact disabling that is a bios setting done before even
> > installing LinuxCNC. It may make winderz seem to be better, but that
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 05:00:12AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> No, in fact disabling that is a bios setting done before even installing
> LinuxCNC. It may make winderz seem to be better, but that context
> switch, done by the relatively slow bios memory is a performance killer
> even if the
On Tuesday 21 September 2021 01:07:20 lkcl wrote:
> On September 21, 2021 12:06:35 AM UTC, Paul Wise
wrote:
> >It sounds like you are talking about userland and Debian still
> > supports a 32-bit userland under a 64-bit Linux kernel on 64-bit
> > devices,
>
> which... and i apologise, i cannot
On September 21, 2021 12:06:35 AM UTC, Paul Wise wrote:
>It sounds like you are talking about userland and Debian still supports
>a 32-bit userland under a 64-bit Linux kernel on 64-bit devices,
which... and i apologise, i cannot remember your name, our
person-running-CNC-lathes pointed out
On Mon, 2021-09-20 at 13:39 +, lkcl wrote:
> significantly reduced executable size, significantly reduced memory
> footprint, resulting in better L1/L2 cache usage with consequent
> power reduction.
It sounds like you are talking about userland and Debian still supports
a 32-bit userland
On Monday 20 September 2021 09:39:00 lkcl wrote:
> On September 20, 2021 1:03:39 PM UTC, Paul Wise
wrote:
> >On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 9:19 AM LinAdmin wrote:
> >> What I would like to see is that the official arm kernels
> >
> >automagically built by Debian could run unchanged on RaPi 32 & 64
>
On September 20, 2021 1:03:39 PM UTC, Paul Wise wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 9:19 AM LinAdmin wrote:
>
>> What I would like to see is that the official arm kernels
>automagically built by Debian could run unchanged on RaPi 32 & 64 bit.
>
>The RPi 4 is 64-bit, is there a reason for running a
On Monday 20 September 2021 09:03:39 Paul Wise wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 9:19 AM LinAdmin wrote:
> > What I would like to see is that the official arm kernels
> > automagically built by Debian could run unchanged on RaPi 32 & 64
> > bit.
>
> The RPi 4 is 64-bit, is there a reason for
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 9:19 AM LinAdmin wrote:
> What I would like to see is that the official arm kernels automagically built
> by Debian could run unchanged on RaPi 32 & 64 bit.
The RPi 4 is 64-bit, is there a reason for running a 32-bit Linux
kernel? (The 64-bit Linux kernel can run 32-bit
On 10.09.21 16:13, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> LinAdmin dijo [Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:51:51AM +0200]:
>> The unnamed decision makers of Debian some unknown time ago
>> decided that Pi and *Pine* stuff won't be supported by Debian.
> Hey, we do have names!
>
> I am one of them. I am willing (and have done
Paul Wise dijo [Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 04:23:52AM +]:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 6:07 PM Gunnar Wolf wrote:
>
> > Please don't pay me. If you offer a good hosting solution and plan to
> > keep it viable in the long run, I can be persuaded to move
> > raspi.debian.net from my current hosting
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 6:07 PM Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Please don't pay me. If you offer a good hosting solution and plan to
> keep it viable in the long run, I can be persuaded to move
> raspi.debian.net from my current hosting provider.
As an interim step, I suggest talking to the debian.net
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 03:35:44PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> They are not commands. They are make targets in the linux kernel source.
> So no man pages. So just like you can do 'make menuconfig' you can do
> 'make bindeb-pkg' once you have done the config.
>
> The linux kernel sources
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 01:04:30PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> The beaglebone is for little bitty machines with barely enough hardware
> to qualify as a cnc driver, a raspi4b can run circles around it while
> browsing the web with firefox, I have done it on that pi4b.
The arm side of the
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 02:52:02PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> And that link has a link to what I wanted to do, but its about 1.5 major
> versions of the kernel out of date. It is for the basic 4.3, and I'm
> already on an rt-preempt 4.19. Nothing earlier supports the pi's native
> video, so
On Monday 13 September 2021 10:09:05 Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 01:17:02PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > I am not aware that it ever existed. So I install the needed meat to
> > make it work, via a card reader and the non-compressed tarball is
> > just under 30 megs. apt
lkcl dijo [Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 10:21:45PM +]:
> >> But I understand you might have better preferences. Please provide me
> >> the details for a web space you will sponsor and keep for several
> >> years, and I will move raspi.debian.net there.
>
> Gunnar: can i ask: I take it that you,
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 01:17:02PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> I am not aware that it ever existed. So I install the needed meat to make
> it work, via a card reader and the non-compressed tarball is just under
> 30 megs. apt sees it, leaves it alone. So its pinned 6 other packages
> for about
On September 12, 2021 10:01:20 PM UTC, Oregano
wrote:
>September 12, 2021 3:19 AM, "Gunnar Wolf" wrote:
here.
>>
>> But I understand you might have better preferences. Please provide me
>> the details for a web space you will sponsor and keep for several
>> years, and I will move
September 12, 2021 3:19 AM, "Gunnar Wolf" wrote:
> Oregano dijo [Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 11:26:37PM +]:
>
>>
>> OK, but nslookup raspi.debian.net and whois 208.97.148.173 shows
>> raspi.debian.net is hosted at NightmareHost, which probably explains
>> the very long delays in seeing the site
On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 11:19 PM Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> ...
> > OK, but nslookup raspi.debian.net and whois 208.97.148.173 shows
> > raspi.debian.net is hosted at NightmareHost, which probably explains
> > the very long delays in seeing the site sometimes. I respect
> > Gunnar's support for
Oregano dijo [Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 11:26:37PM +]:
> >> I have some doubts that debian.net has the same ownership
> >> than official debian.org?
> >
> > debian.net and debian.org have the same ownership (Debian, via our
> > fiscal sponsor SPI). debian.org subdomains are setup by the Debian
> >
Gene Heskett wrote:
> It night "sound interesting" if it had sound, but thats the quietest
> movie I've watched in months. No audio buttons to be found.
sound appears to be muted. In the latest and greatest firefox it worked
after unmuting
--
FCD6 3719 0FFB F1BF 38EA 4727 5348 5F1F DCFE BCB0
On zondag 12 september 2021 01:26:37 CEST Oregano wrote:
> OK, but nslookup raspi.debian.net and whois 208.97.148.173 shows
> raspi.debian.net is hosted at NightmareHost, which probably explains the
> very long delays in seeing the site sometimes. I respect Gunnar's support
> for raspi's, but the
September 11, 2021 11:16 PM, "Paul Wise" wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 7:50 AM LinAdmin wrote:
>
>> I have some doubts that debian.net has the same ownership
>> than official debian.org?
>
> debian.net and debian.org have the same ownership (Debian, via our
> fiscal sponsor SPI). debian.org
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 2:13 PM Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> I am one of them. I am willing (and have done so extensively) to put
> time into making Debian easy to use in the Raspberry family, but I am
> convinced raspi-firmware cannot be part of Debian itself.
While raspi-firmware can't be in Debian
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 7:50 AM LinAdmin wrote:
> I have some doubts that debian.net has the same ownership
> than official debian.org?
debian.net and debian.org have the same ownership (Debian, via our
fiscal sponsor SPI). debian.org subdomains are setup by the Debian
sysadmins and mostly run
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 4:05 PM Gene Heskett wrote:
> So why do we not have a .deb builder for kernels.?
The upstream Linux kernel build system can build .deb files using the
`make deb-pkg` (build .dsc+.deb files) or the `make bindeb-pkg` (build
.deb files).
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 2:35 PM Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> They are not designed to suit you. I guess you want to build your own
> kernels with the RT_PREEMPT enabled, and that's not something you will
> get with any of the mainstream Linux distributions.
This is incorrect, Debian has had RT kernels
September 11, 2021 11:30 AM, "Peter Ehlert" wrote:
> On 9/11/21 1:11 AM, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 10:01:49 +0300
>> Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Andrei -- happy Debian user of a PINE A64+ and (still) considering
>> the Pinebook Pro for my next laptop
>>
On 9/11/21 7:24 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Sb, 11 sep 21, 04:30:21, Peter Ehlert wrote:
On 9/11/21 1:11 AM, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 10:01:49 +0300
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
Kind regards,
Andrei -- happy Debian user of a PINE A64+ and (still) considering
the Pinebook Pro
On Sb, 11 sep 21, 04:30:21, Peter Ehlert wrote:
>
> On 9/11/21 1:11 AM, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 10:01:49 +0300
> > Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> >
> > > > Kind regards,
> > > > Andrei -- happy Debian user of a PINE A64+ and (still) considering
> > > > the Pinebook Pro for my
On Saturday 11 September 2021 04:11:26 Keith Bainbridge wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 10:01:49 +0300
>
> Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> >>Kind regards,
> >>Andrei -- happy Debian user of a PINE A64+ and (still) considering
> >>the Pinebook Pro for my next laptop
>
> There's an interesting review of the
On 9/11/21 1:11 AM, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 10:01:49 +0300
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
Kind regards,
Andrei -- happy Debian user of a PINE A64+ and (still) considering
the Pinebook Pro for my next laptop
There's an interesting review of the Pro here:
On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 4:27 AM Keith Bainbridge wrote:
> ...
> There's an interesting review of the Pro here:
> https://www.jeremymorgan.com/blog/linux/90-days-with-pinebook-pro/
>
> Sounds interesting. Pity they are out of stock
They seem to be always out of stock. I've been trying to buy a
On Friday 10 September 2021 12:46:54 Reco wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 12:04:56PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > So why do we not have a .deb builder for kernels.?
>
> wiki.debian.org is your friend, consider learning how to search it.
> In this particular case, you probably want [1].
>
>
On Friday 10 September 2021 12:32:49 Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 12:04:56PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > I knew that Reco, but the howto install after building it is the
> > best kept secret on this ball of rock and water, so I invented my
> > own installer. The revelant
On Friday 10 September 2021 10:35:09 Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Gene Heskett dijo [Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 08:07:56AM -0400]:
> > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:50:24AM +0200, LinAdmin wrote:
> > > > I have some doubts that debian.net has the same ownership
> > > > than official debian.org?
> > >
> > > RPi
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 12:04:56PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> So why do we not have a .deb builder for kernels.?
wiki.debian.org is your friend, consider learning how to search it.
In this particular case, you probably want [1].
Reco
[1]
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 12:04:56PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> I knew that Reco, but the howto install after building it is the best
> kept secret on this ball of rock and water, so I invented my own
> installer. The revelant files total under 30 megs as a tarball.
>
> So why do we not have a
On Friday 10 September 2021 10:30:28 Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 08:07:56AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Friday 10 September 2021 06:59:17 Reco wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:50:24AM +0200, LinAdmin wrote:
> > > > I have some doubts that debian.net has the
Gene Heskett dijo [Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 08:07:56AM -0400]:
> > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:50:24AM +0200, LinAdmin wrote:
> > > I have some doubts that debian.net has the same ownership
> > > than official debian.org?
> >
> > RPi images from raspi.debian.net are GPG-signed by Gunnar Wolf's key
> >
Hi.
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 08:07:56AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Friday 10 September 2021 06:59:17 Reco wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:50:24AM +0200, LinAdmin wrote:
> > > I have some doubts that debian.net has the same ownership
> > > than official debian.org?
> >
> > RPi
LinAdmin dijo [Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:51:51AM +0200]:
> The unnamed decision makers of Debian some unknown time ago
> decided that Pi and *Pine* stuff won't be supported by Debian.
Hey, we do have names!
I am one of them. I am willing (and have done so extensively) to put
time into making
On Friday 10 September 2021 06:59:17 Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:50:24AM +0200, LinAdmin wrote:
> > I have some doubts that debian.net has the same ownership
> > than official debian.org?
>
> RPi images from raspi.debian.net are GPG-signed by Gunnar Wolf's key
> (who is
Hi.
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:50:24AM +0200, LinAdmin wrote:
> I have some doubts that debian.net has the same ownership
> than official debian.org?
RPi images from raspi.debian.net are GPG-signed by Gunnar Wolf's key
(who is Debian Developer), that's good enough for me.
Reco
The unnamed decision makers of Debian some unknown time ago
decided that Pi and *Pine* stuff won't be supported by Debian.
On 03.09.21 22:30, oregano+deb...@disroot.org wrote:
> At $45 with 3GB RAM, optional eMMC (35 for 64 GB), WiFi,
> etc., it seems interesting, but why is there almost zero
>
I have some doubts that debian.net has the same ownership
than official debian.org?
On 04.09.21 10:48, Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 09:51:30AM +0200, LinAdmin wrote:
>> The unnamed decision makers of Debian some unknown time ago
>> decided that Pi and Pine stuff won't be
On September 10, 2021 1:54:36 AM UTC, Pete Batard wrote:
>I get it, you are somehow more "entuned" to pass judgement than
>somebody
>else on this list. And of course, in that portrait, I am the black
>sheep,
this is evasion through a technique known in CRNHQ.org terminology as
Hi Paul,
On 2021.09.10 00:10, Paul Wise wrote:
On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 9:46 PM Pete Batard wrote:
If you read my posts carefully, you find that the only slight request
that I have made is that Debian (i.e. people on this list whom I expect
to know better) should stop advertising pre-built
On 2021.09.09 23:28, lkcl wrote:
Pete: thank you for pointing out that you've actively contributed, do keep
emphasising that, it will help undo some of the damage.
Talk about implication loaded statement here.
So you are taking as fact that everybody is agreeing with your *opinion*
that I
On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 9:46 PM Pete Batard wrote:
> If you read my posts carefully, you find that the only slight request
> that I have made is that Debian (i.e. people on this list whom I expect
> to know better) should stop advertising pre-built images as the one
> solution to install Debian on
On September 9, 2021 9:46:34 PM UTC, Pete Batard wrote:
Pete: thank you for pointing out that you've actively contributed, do keep
emphasising that, it will help undo some of the damage.
i do get that you feel you're not making "demands": i have had people regularly
misconstrue what i say
Boy are people misinterpreting my intent here, as well as making me say
things (such as "Debian isn't as suits me") that I didn't say.
Vagrant has properly conveyed what I wanted to state, and that should
have been the end of it. But you still have to come around, to
misinterpret the message
On September 9, 2021 4:17:08 PM UTC, Vagrant Cascadian
wrote:
>I think I missed that decree... I daresay, this argument has been
>running around in circles, based on some false assertions...
and a sense of "entitlement". yes, you, Pete Batard: you carry a strong
"entitlement" vibe. an
On 2021-09-09, Pete Batard wrote:
> Okay, maybe I didn't express myself properly here, because we're
> basically on the same page. I am not saying that where possible, Debian
> should not care about providing what you suggest. I'm only saying that,
> *WHEN* that is not possible, as is the case
On 2021.09.09 04:43, Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 10:00 AM Pete Batard wrote:
Yes, but that is *outside* of the scope of Debian, just like booting
Debian on UEFI x86 based PCs also requires the use of intel or AMD
non-free blobs (for RAM bringup, ME and all the other stuff that CPU
On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 10:00 AM Pete Batard wrote:
> Yes, but that is *outside* of the scope of Debian, just like booting
> Debian on UEFI x86 based PCs also requires the use of intel or AMD
> non-free blobs (for RAM bringup, ME and all the other stuff that CPU
> manufacturers have decided they
On 2021.09.07 18:36, lkcl wrote:
On September 7, 2021 4:16:27 PM UTC, Pete Batard wrote:
And my point is that, since we are dealing with non free systems, it
makes little difference whether the non-free blobs reside in an EEPROM
or on boot media.
it makes ALL the difference in the world.
On September 7, 2021 4:16:27 PM UTC, Pete Batard wrote:
>And my point is that, since we are dealing with non free systems, it
>makes little difference whether the non-free blobs reside in an EEPROM
>or on boot media.
it makes ALL the difference in the world.
not only is it deeply
On 2021.09.07 15:55, Reco wrote:
It's illogical, but still - as long as the device has non-modifiable
firmware it's considered good, proper and "free".
If said firmware can be modified (as in - reflashed in EEPROM), or worse
- the device requires firmware to be uploaded on it at every poweron -
On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 03:02:20PM +0100, Pete Batard wrote:
> On 2021.09.07 13:31, Reco wrote:
> > Yet there's a difference. Intel ME or AMD PSP do not require firmware to
> > be written on a boot media, thus making the boot media redistributable
> > and (other blobs excluded) - DFSG-compliant.
>
On 2021.09.07 13:31, Reco wrote:
Yet there's a difference. Intel ME or AMD PSP do not require firmware to
be written on a boot media, thus making the boot media redistributable
and (other blobs excluded) - DFSG-compliant.
I disagree.
The reason why the firmware needs to be written on boot
On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 11:00:29AM +0100, Pete Batard wrote:
> Hi Reco,
>
> On 2021.09.07 10:42, Reco wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 10:29:40AM +0100, Pete Batard wrote:
> > > Hi Gunnar,
> > >
> > > On 2021.09.06 18:59, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > > > Gene Heskett dijo [Sat, Sep
Hi Reco,
On 2021.09.07 10:42, Reco wrote:
Hi.
On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 10:29:40AM +0100, Pete Batard wrote:
Hi Gunnar,
On 2021.09.06 18:59, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Gene Heskett dijo [Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 09:43:07AM -0400]:
(...)
So I found my own solutions. So, debian-arm, please make up
Hi.
On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 10:29:40AM +0100, Pete Batard wrote:
> Hi Gunnar,
>
> On 2021.09.06 18:59, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > Gene Heskett dijo [Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 09:43:07AM -0400]:
> > > (...)
> > > So I found my own solutions. So, debian-arm, please make up your mind, do
> > > you
Hi Gunnar,
On 2021.09.06 18:59, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Gene Heskett dijo [Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 09:43:07AM -0400]:
(...)
So I found my own solutions. So, debian-arm, please make up your mind, do
you support the pi's or do you NOT support the pi's?
Debian has a very clear line set: We do _NOT_
On Sb, 04 sep 21, 08:31:11, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2021-09-04, LinAdmin wrote:
> > The unnamed decision makers of Debian some unknown time ago
> > decided that Pi and Pine stuff won't be supported by Debian.
>
> I personally have added support in Debian for:
>
> Raspberry Pi 1
>
If anyone wants to help to make Debian work on the RPi without the
proprietary boot firmware from Broadcom/RPi folks, the solution is to
package a VC4 GPU compiler for Debian and then improve and package the
rpi-open-firmware project.
https://github.com/librerpi/rpi-open-firmware/
On Monday 06 September 2021 13:59:12 Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Gene Heskett dijo [Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 09:43:07AM -0400]:
> > (...)
> > So I found my own solutions. So, debian-arm, please make up your
> > mind, do you support the pi's or do you NOT support the pi's?
>
> Debian has a very clear line
Gene Heskett dijo [Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 09:43:07AM -0400]:
> (...)
> So I found my own solutions. So, debian-arm, please make up your mind, do
> you support the pi's or do you NOT support the pi's?
Debian has a very clear line set: We do _NOT_ ship non-free software,
no exceptions. Given the
On Saturday 04 September 2021 13:08:42 Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 08:31:11AM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> > On 2021-09-04, LinAdmin wrote:
> > > The unnamed decision makers of Debian some unknown time ago
> > > decided that Pi and Pine stuff won't be supported by
On Saturday 04 September 2021 11:31:11 Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2021-09-04, LinAdmin wrote:
> > The unnamed decision makers of Debian some unknown time ago
> > decided that Pi and Pine stuff won't be supported by Debian.
>
> I personally have added support in Debian for:
>
> Raspberry Pi 1
On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 08:30:52PM +, oregano+deb...@disroot.org wrote:
> At $45 with 3GB RAM, optional eMMC (35 for 64 GB), WiFi, etc., it seems
interesting, but why is there almost zero coverage on Debian sites?
>
Maybe we haven't got the hardware: maybe we haven't seen it to test? [See
On Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 08:31:11AM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> On 2021-09-04, LinAdmin wrote:
> > The unnamed decision makers of Debian some unknown time ago
> > decided that Pi and Pine stuff won't be supported by Debian.
>
> I personally have added support in Debian for:
>
> Raspberry
On Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 09:43:07AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>On Saturday 04 September 2021 04:48:48 Reco wrote:
>
>> Whatever floats your boat.
>
>That attitude is Indicating to me that debian-arm still has zero interest
>in arm. A sad truth IMO.
Thanks Gene, that's *really* going to help
On 2021-09-04, LinAdmin wrote:
> The unnamed decision makers of Debian some unknown time ago
> decided that Pi and Pine stuff won't be supported by Debian.
I personally have added support in Debian for:
Raspberry Pi 1
Raspberry Pi 2b
Raspberry Pi 3b+
Pine64+
Pinebook
Pinebook Pro
On Saturday 04 September 2021 04:48:48 Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 09:51:30AM +0200, LinAdmin wrote:
> > The unnamed decision makers of Debian some unknown time ago
> > decided that Pi and Pine stuff won't be supported by Debian.
>
> Except that Raspberry Pis are supported
Hi.
On Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 09:51:30AM +0200, LinAdmin wrote:
> The unnamed decision makers of Debian some unknown time ago
> decided that Pi and Pine stuff won't be supported by Debian.
Except that Raspberry Pis are supported by Debian.
There are even pre-built images at
The unnamed decision makers of Debian some unknown time ago
decided that Pi and Pine stuff won't be supported by Debian.
I switched to Ubuntu LTS which made me (and many others) happy.
On 03.09.21 22:30, oregano+deb...@disroot.org wrote:
> At $45 with 3GB RAM, optional eMMC (35 for 64 GB), WiFi,
86 matches
Mail list logo
