I'm so !@#$^* close I can taste it.
I can erase the part.
I can write the the part.
I properly avoid the EC code. No bricks yet.
What I can't do is write anything other than a zero. :(
For whatever reason my writes into the SPIDAT (0xfeab) register don't
work. I've verified this in both the
On 14/08/06 11:16 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 19:32 -0600, Ronald G Minnich wrote:
Or if we should just do this in linuxbios, and use the linuxbios i2c code?
That makes sense -- it's only a single register write to enable the
DCON.
However, we also want the
Jordan Crouse wrote:
On 14/08/06 11:16 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 19:32 -0600, Ronald G Minnich wrote:
Or if we should just do this in linuxbios, and use the linuxbios i2c code?
That makes sense -- it's only a single register write to enable the
DCON.
However, we
* Ronald G Minnich rminnich@lanl.gov [060814 16:46]:
David Woodhouse wrote:
Can we just indicate its existence in the
OpenFirmware device tree? Oh, wait :)
If only, right, stefan?
That idea (OF tree for x86/x86_64 side) has not proven acceptable to the
kernel community ...
Sorry,
Stefan Reinauer wrote:
- Because LinuxBIOS does not export the device tree in the LinuxBIOS
table.
I suggest we talk about the second of those. Would that not be exactly
what we want?
sadly, we can't solve all the linuxbios problems on olpc, :-)
we need to communicate a bit of info,
[Changing name of thread...]
a) I think we need our own sub-architecture, sooner rather than later.
I could give a bunch of reasons, but I suspect that they are obvious to
everyone here, considering how little our hardware resembles a legacy PC.
b) Do we really need PCI autoconfiguration at
On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 07:40 -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote:
[Changing name of thread...]
a) I think we need our own sub-architecture, sooner rather than later.
I could give a bunch of reasons, but I suspect that they are obvious to
everyone here, considering how little our hardware resembles
Mitch Bradley wrote:
[Changing name of thread...]
a) I think we need our own sub-architecture, sooner rather than later.
I could give a bunch of reasons, but I suspect that they are obvious to
everyone here, considering how little our hardware resembles a legacy PC.
b) Do we really need
Hi!
Small update: I made an Ubuntu package out of this modified Xephyr. I
don't if it can be useful to anyone, or whether it is easy to convert
it into an RPM, but here it is anyway:
http://www.manucornet.net/pub/olpc/xserver-xephyr_6.6.1-0ubuntu4_i386.deb
You'll want to run Xephyr as:
Xephyr
Our big set of variables is all the stuff/buses that can be on USB.
There is a trivially easy way to handle USB device trees in our environment:
Since USB is hot-pluggable, the device tree is inherently a temporal
approximation of reality, because a device could be plugged or unplugged
Hi!
How about a '-swizzle' switch to optionally turn on the swizzle mode ?
Without out that it makes the modified package not so useful for people
wanting to also use Xephyr 'normally'.
Absolutely, that would be great! I attached the new patch to the bug:
* Marcelo Tosatti [EMAIL PROTECTED] [060815 00:06]:
The idea is to have LinuxBIOS support LZMA compression, although Linux
could do that by itself (BTW, I fail to see the advantage of having
LinuxBIOS support LZMA instead of the kernel).
because the kernel is not the only part in rom that can
Hello,
I am a developer for the TamTam project and I am
currently working on implementing keyboard interaction in TamTam. I recently
noticed that some keyboards wont always output multiple keys pressed at
the same time. Usually, a third key that is pressed, depending on its
location
Now we need to bother Ollie, he is our real vga expert :-)
Ollie, how should we do this. I have ideas, but I want to hear your
ideas, they will be better than mine.
ron
Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
(switching to olpc-devel)
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 01:14:04PM -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote:
On
Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
The idea is to have LinuxBIOS support LZMA compression, although Linux
could do that by itself (BTW, I fail to see the advantage of having
LinuxBIOS support LZMA instead of the kernel).
yes, but: you're assuming our target is always linux -- it's not. In
some of my
Looks nice. I like the progress bar.
I do miss the icons, however; too bad.
If you hit a char and drop into the shell, then try to run buildrom
again, it won't work. Any idea why?
ron
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@laptop.org
Ronald G Minnich wrote:
Looks nice. I like the progress bar.
I do miss the icons, however; too bad.
If you hit a char and drop into the shell, then try to run buildrom
17 matches
Mail list logo
