On Wednesday, October 11, 2023, Stan Johnson wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Please post a link that indicates whether the GHC Haskell Compiler
> license is compatible with the GPL. I haven't been able to find anything
> online regarding compatibility. I would be interested in any license
> issues before
On Monday, May 8, 2023, Ben Westover wrote:
> Is this something I can fix, or does modern Xorg just need more VRAM?
try 640x480 and/or 16bpp.
l.
--
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Tuesday, April 18, 2023, Ben Westover wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 4/16/23 10:18 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
>>
>> There is also the case where you launch Xorg via gdb and then run it.
>>
>> $ gdb `which Xorg`
>> (gdb) run
>> (gdb) bt full
>
> Perfect! I was able to get a full backtrace, which
(please distribute widely to all FOSSHW Power-related mailing lists,
but reply to libre-soc-isa - many many thanks for patience and understanding)
the Libre-SOC Project's NLnet-funded work of the past three years
has reached the point where it's time to submit RFCs to the OpenPOWER
Foundation
On Thursday, March 23, 2023, Linux User #330250
wrote:
> I also see BE disappearing from lots and lots of software. My assumption
> is that it simply isn't viable anymore, as most users and developers
> have moved on.
except in Japan, India, China, and anywhere else in the world
where the main
On Wednesday, March 22, 2023, Linux User #330250
wrote:
> On the other hand, I don't really see performant and cheap (for desktop
> systems) systems on the market that aren't mainstream x86 (Intel and
> AMD). Letting those now older alternatives go (that were mostly servers
> to begin with) is
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 9:32 PM Linux User #330250
wrote:
> I was looking at those projects in the past, but there are two problems:
> 1. They are way too expensive in terms of a performance to price ratio.
> 2. They
On Friday, March 10, 2023, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-03-09 at 11:05 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
>
>> I vaguely remember someone mentioning a service where one could ssh
>> onto ppc64el machines. I need access to a POWER10 machine to track a
>> bug. platti.d.o is POWER8 AFAIK.
>
> This
On Thursday, March 9, 2023, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I vaguely remember someone mentioning a service where one could ssh
> onto ppc64el machines.
university of oregon's "hub" via the OpenPOWER Foundation.
if that's of interest i can introduce you to erik and
sameer, you will need
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 12:10 PM Paul Wise wrote:
> > Project Ortega is the libre firmware for the BCM5719. Update through fwupd
>
> Personally I very much dislike fwupd/LVFS as a place to distribute
> firmware from, since it is designed for proprietary vendor firmware.
and critically relies on
On Wednesday, August 24, 2022, Paul Wise wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On the open firmware Debian wiki page, I note that Raptor Computing
> ppc64el devices have libre Ethernet firmware but that this firmware is
> not yet available in Debian. I read elsewhere that Raptor devices also
> have a libre boot
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 4:17 AM Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> I never really took notice that IBM captured the projects. But with
> your lens it sounds about right.
>
> ("Captured", as in regulatory capture as seen in the US.
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 12:09 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
>
> On 7/16/21 12:59 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> > Does it have to be one or the other? Can't you have both?
>
> Well, you could have runtime detection
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 2:55 PM Lennart Sorensen
wrote:
> Some years ago I tried to get such runtime detection added for vlc.
> Upstream was certainly far from helpful and just about hostile to the
> idea of adding
On 7/13/21, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> I wasn't really a fan of that change but my stance is that we should use
> AltiVec
> in packages where it makes sense as the majority of the ppc64 port users
> will
> have a machine that suppport AltiVec.
please *do not* do this.
we are designing
hi folks quick question, would it be of interest to hear of the plans in
Libre-SOC to do an auto-generated (compiled) emulator of VSX instructions,
for use in the linux kernel?
if you are familiar with paul mackerras's work lib/powerpc/sstep.c which
emulates Load-Quad and others from an illegal
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 7:34 PM Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> You probably need to go to frame 1 ('f 1' under gdb) and disassemble
> ('disass .' or 'disass' followed by a bunch of pages). That will show
> the offending
On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 8:50 AM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
>
> On 3/8/21 9:38 AM, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> >> a cursory scan shows no evidence of the use of VSX there.
> >
> > If needed... I believe it is possible to disable PCRE2's JIT at configure
> > time.
>
> We certainly shouldn't
On Sunday, March 7, 2021, Riccardo Mottola
wrote:.
>
>
> the issue is most probably in libpcre2 or Qt5Core
>
> #0 0x7fffe9c5fa30 in ?? ()
> #1 0x702c406c in ?? () from /usr/lib/powerpc64-linux-gnu/l
> ibpcre2-16.so.0
On Saturday, March 6, 2021, Riccardo Mottola
wrote:
> Hi Luke,
>
>
> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>>
>> just to confirm: that's definitely "setting machine to capabilities that
the machine doesn't have, then requesting that feature and gcc 10 says
'ok'"
On Tuesday, March 2, 2021, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 2, 2021, Riccardo Mottola
wrote:
>
>> actually the original point is even for PPC32, note just PPC64. The
>> configure check added by Adrian in Firefox checks if the compiler
>&
On Tuesday, March 2, 2021, Riccardo Mottola
wrote:
> actually the original point is even for PPC32, note just PPC64. The
> configure check added by Adrian in Firefox checks if the compiler
> accepts -maltivec and just enables it in the build.
> However, this assumption is not correct and causes
changing subject, for reference / background:
* Paul Mackerras is working on an experimental branch to add VSX
https://github.com/paulusmack/microwatt/blob/vecvsx/decode1.vhdl
he was experimenting to see what was needed to get Fedora booting. the
internal design is a Finite State Machine.
On Monday, March 1, 2021, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 12:22:22PM +0000, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
>> ---
>> crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 8:39 AM Gabriel Paubert wro
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 8:39 AM Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> Beware that VSX is not Altivec. Altivec was called VMX by IBM and
> VSX is a superset of Altivec (IIRC).
>
> G4 and G5 do not have VSX.
apologies i tend to lump
On Monday, March 1, 2021, Riccardo Mottola
wrote:
> A quick solution would to have this configure as a convenience, but have
a way to pass an --enable-altivec and -disable-altivec (or with/without?)
parameter to configure.
EABI v2.0 rather unfortunately, despite it being optional in the
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 12:50 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Everyone, please avoid followups to debian-po...@lists.debian.org.
> Unless something is relevant to *all* architectures (hint: discussion of
> riscv or arm issues don't qualify), keep replies to the appropriate
> port-specific mailing
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 us
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Adam D. Barratt
wrote:
>> i don't know: i'm an outsider who doesn't have the information in
>> short-term memory, which is why i cc'd the debian-riscv team as they
>> have current facts and knowledge foremost in their minds. which is
>> why i included them.
>
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Adam D. Barratt
wrote:
>> what is the reason why that package is not moving forward?
>
> I assume you're referring to the dpkg upload that's in proposed-updates
> waiting for the
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 9:03 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
> armel/armhf:
>
>
> * Undesirable to keep the hardware running beyond 2020. armhf VM
>support uncertain. (DSA)
>- Source: [DSA Sprint report]
[other affected 32-bit architectures removed but still relevant]
... i'm
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
On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Andreas Henriksson andr...@fatal.se wrote:
Hello Adrian!
Thanks for raising awareness about this issue. If there's anything
I can do to help please tell me. That the new util-linux version hasn't
been built yet sounds like it can't be avoided as it was just
zram... there actually exists something called Z-Ram, it was bought
by one of the major companies: it's actually 3D (stacked) ram and thus
you get a significantly higher memory density. thus, the use of the
name zram caused some confusion, that you had access to this quite
rare type of RAM memory
34 matches
Mail list logo
