Arm-dev

arm-dev@lists.centos.org

1 participants
685 discussions

Odroid-HC1 came, but
by Robert Moskowitz 28 Nov '18

28 Nov '18

got myself an ODroid-HC1, but seems I forgot some things... Power supply! I have a right sized barrel to USB cable, but my Ankar is rated up to 3A and is fused at any draw above that. I remember looking at power supplies before, but can't find the link. UART to USB. The ones I have won't fit. They are for connecting to pins, not a connector like the HC1 has. What do I get? Plus what are the pin-outs? I really need to get a schematic for this... Case cover. For some strange reason, I thought it would come with a cover. I see now, that if you stack them you only need one cover, so it is most likely a separate order. The unit came with a small bag with 2 screws, but I cannot find any holes in the case for any screws! Strange. So after I get at least the power supply and UART to USB for console, I will be asking how to get this to boot completely from the HD like I do with my Cubies! thanks Bob

2 5

back at it
by Robert Moskowitz 22 Nov '18

22 Nov '18

Oct 27th I was the pedestrian in a pedestrian/auto accident. Healing well enough. PT for walking and that should correct in a couple weeks. Dislocated right shoulder and that is the real limiter for the next 4 weeks. Affects my typing and mousing. Plus for the work here, reaching for and doing all I do with my arm boards. Thus I hope now to spend some time on Centos/Fedora arm work, but reduced until the arm is out of the sling. Bob

3 2

Re: [Arm-dev] Armhfp community-SCLs_php72-testing v7.2.11-1
by Mark Verlinde 13 Nov '18

13 Nov '18

Hi, No errors or misbehavior sofar after updating to php72-7.2.11-1. This for the installed requirements of nextcloud as shown below. Installed from community-SCLs_php72-testing: php72-1.0-1.el7.armv7hl php72-runtime-1.0-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-cli-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-common-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-fpm-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-gd-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-intl-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-json-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-ldap-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-mbstring-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-mysqlnd-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-opcache-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-pdo-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-pear-1.10.5-5.el7.noarch php72-php-process-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl php72-php-xml-7.2.11-1.el7.armv7hl Installed (local) SCL's rebuilds: php72-php-smbclient-0.9.0-3.ns7.armv7hl php72-php-pecl-zip-1.15.2-1.ns7.armv7hl php72-php-pecl-mcrypt-1.0.1-7.ns7.armv7hl php72-php-pecl-apcu-5.1.9-1.ns7.armv7hl Mark Verlinde -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Afzender: Pablo Sebastián Greco<pablo(a)fliagreco.com.ar> Verstuurd: Vrijdag 2 November 2018 11:20 Aan: Conversations around CentOS on ARM hardware <arm-dev(a)centos.org> Onderwerp: Re: [Arm-dev] Armhfp community-SCLs_php72-testing v7.2.11-1 Mark, just removed the wrong build and pushed the right one, it should appear there in a few hours. Thanks for reporting!. Pablo. El 2/11/18 a las 06:51, Mark Verlinde escribió: -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Afzender:Mark Verlinde <mark(a)havak.nl> <mailto:mark@havak.nl> Verstuurd: Vrijdag 2 November 2018 9:16 Aan: Conversations around CentOS on ARM hardware <arm-dev(a)centos.org> <mailto:arm-dev@centos.org> Onderwerp: [Arm-dev] Armhfp community-SCLs_php72-testing v7.2.11-1 Hi, In the community-SCLs_php72-testing repository php-7.2.11-1 showed up. Again, thank you for the effort! We would like to test them but they turn out to be opt-in packages; Looks like the %scl tag was not set during the build. Jumped to a wrong conclusion here, sorry for that. The spec in the source package is not converted for a sclo-build. Could someone reissue the build with the proper buildtag? Rephrase: Is it possible to reissue the build from a sclo enabled (remi safe) source package? With the promise we report our findings, Mark Verlinde _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev(a)centos.org <mailto:Arm-dev@centos.org> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev> _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev(a)centos.org <mailto:Arm-dev@centos.org> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev> _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev(a)centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

2 1

Re: [Arm-dev] Kernel 4.19.1
by Mark Verlinde 13 Nov '18

13 Nov '18

Hi, No anomalies on my Orange Pi Plus 2E (SOC: Allwinner H3), Did not check video (HDMI-Out) yet; It did not work with the kernel 4.18.x. Using it headless anyway it did/does not have any prio for me. Mark Verlinde -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Afzender:Pablo Sebastián Greco <pablo(a)fliagreco.com.ar> > Verstuurd: Zaterdag 10 November 2018 12:57 > Aan: Conversations around CentOS on ARM hardware <arm-dev(a)centos.org> > Onderwerp: [Arm-dev] Kernel 4.19.1 > > > In a few hours, hopefully, there will be a kernel 4.19.1 for armhfp > landing here https://armv7.dev.centos.org/repodir/community-kernel-latest/ > That kernel is almost the same as fedora, with only a few tweaks, but > since it is all very new, please test carefully, and report back. > > Don't say I didn't warn you.... :D > > Pablo. > > _______________________________________________ > Arm-dev mailing list > Arm-dev(a)centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev >

2 1

kernel source aarch64
by Skorpeo Skorpeo 13 Nov '18

13 Nov '18

Hi, If I want to make changes to the config and recompile the kernel where can I get the kernel sources for aarch64? Thanks much!

2 1

Kernel 4.19.1
by Pablo Sebastián Greco 10 Nov '18

10 Nov '18

In a few hours, hopefully, there will be a kernel 4.19.1 for armhfp landing here https://armv7.dev.centos.org/repodir/community-kernel-latest/ That kernel is almost the same as fedora, with only a few tweaks, but since it is all very new, please test carefully, and report back. Don't say I didn't warn you.... :D Pablo.

1 0

Re: [Arm-dev] Armhfp community-SCLs_php72-testing v7.2.11-1
by Mark Verlinde 02 Nov '18

02 Nov '18

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Afzender:Mark Verlinde <mark(a)havak.nl> > Verstuurd: Vrijdag 2 November 2018 9:16 > Aan: Conversations around CentOS on ARM hardware <arm-dev(a)centos.org> > Onderwerp: [Arm-dev] Armhfp community-SCLs_php72-testing v7.2.11-1 > > > > Hi, > > In the community-SCLs_php72-testing repository php-7.2.11-1 showed up. > Again, thank you for the effort! > > We would like to test them but they turn out to be opt-in packages; > Looks like the %scl tag was not set during the build. > Jumped to a wrong conclusion here, sorry for that. The spec in the source package is not converted for a sclo-build. > Could someone reissue the build with the proper buildtag? Rephrase: Is it possible to reissue the build from a sclo enabled (remi safe) source package? > > With the promise we report our findings, > > Mark Verlinde > > _______________________________________________ > Arm-dev mailing list > Arm-dev(a)centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev >

2 1

Armhfp community-SCLs_php72-testing v7.2.11-1
by Mark Verlinde 02 Nov '18

02 Nov '18

Hi, In the community-SCLs_php72-testing repository php-7.2.11-1 showed up. Again, thank you for the effort! We would like to test them but they turn out to be opt-in packages; Looks like the %scl tag was not set during the build. Could someone reissue the build with the proper buildtag? With the promise we report our findings, Mark Verlinde

1 0

MacchiatoBin support int the Centos7
by Marcin Wojtas 30 Oct '18

30 Oct '18

Hi Jim, Since the newest Centos7 works out-of-the box with the latest MacchiatoBin firmware and also the integrated NICs are supported (beggining from kernel-alt-4.14.0-49.13.1.el7a), can you please shift MacchiatoBin to 'Supported Hardware' section in https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/AltArch/AArch64 ? Thanks, Marcin

3 3

Enterprise distros and the two faces of 'reliability'
by Fred Gleason 28 Oct '18

28 Oct '18

Howdy Folks: Our discussion of the distinctive elements of CentOS’s Aarch64 variant has gotten me pondering. What does an ‘enterprise’ distro bring to the table that makes it desirable over the alternatives available? (By ‘enterprise distro’, I here mean the stream of data originated by the Upstream Provider, as well as those modified and distributed by all the various downstream projects, including CentOS). To my mind, I see two basic categories that are relevant here: 1) ‘Enterprise’ features, by which I mean things like: supports ‘big iron’ systems, supports fault tolerance and scalability, interoperates well with all of the common ‘non-native’ protocols and features found in a typical large computing environment. 2) ‘Stability’ features, by which I mean: has a well-defined infrastructure for distributing code fixes and security updates, has a long support lifetime, manages the ABI carefully so as to ensure that system updates can be applied with good confidence that they will not break existing locally-installed applications. These two categories are largely orthogonal. I say ‘largely’ because there is a hidden implicit commonality: reliability. Yet the presence of one need not necessarily imply the presence (or even desirability) of the other. For example, a project that uses an ‘embedded’ board (BeagleBoard, etc) to make small, autonomous ‘widget’ type devices really does not care about about the presence of 1), while 2) can be a highly desirable attribute. Category 1) is essentially an *operational* attribute, desirable in certain use cases but superfluous (or even counterproductive) in others, while category 2) addresses *maintenance* issues, critical for long-term service and support of a system but largely irrelevant to the typical day-to-day operation of applications. All of this to pose the question: is an ‘enterprise’ distro (in the specific sense meant here) an appropriate long-term choice for an ‘embedded’ project? Given the stated intention of the Upstream Provider to support only ARM systems that integrate APCI and comply with SBSA [Server Base System Architecture] standards in future major releases (see https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/arm-dev/2017-October/003120.html), is such a distro an appropriate long-term choice for an ‘embedded’ project? Cheers! |----------------------------------------------------------------------| | Frederick F. Gleason, Jr. | Chief Developer | | | Paravel Systems | |----------------------------------------------------------------------| | A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow. | | -- General George Patton | |----------------------------------------------------------------------|

6 10

← Newer
1
...
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
...
69
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

Arm-dev