On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Dennis Lan (dlan)
wrote:
>
>
> On Saturday, June 8, 2013, luke.leighton wrote:
>>
>> right - too many people contributed to this, input from jon smirl,
>> wookie, maxime, tomasz, henrik, i've made a start here and will
>> continue editing: this is notes for me to p
On Saturday, June 8, 2013, luke.leighton wrote:
> right - too many people contributed to this, input from jon smirl,
> wookie, maxime, tomasz, henrik, i've made a start here and will
> continue editing: this is notes for me to put forward an agenda for
> discussion:
>
> http://hands.com/~lkcl/allw
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 11:08 PM, Maxime Ripard
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 07:26:49PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
>> maxime: we need to talk :)
>>
>> please tell me in 4 or 5 sentences what you've managed to do so far,
>> expanding a little on what thomas says below, more specifically what
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
Debian in general does NOT cross compile.
The official debian archive is not cross-compiled and most likely never
will be.
However recently arm's new 64-bit architecture (known by arm and
autotools as aarch64 and by debian as arm64) has turned up on the scene.
Many
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 07:26:49PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
> maxime: we need to talk :)
>
> please tell me in 4 or 5 sentences what you've managed to do so far,
> expanding a little on what thomas says below, more specifically what
> it achieves and/or allows rather than technically what it
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:02:03PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
>> well, tough. get me up to speed, *fast*.
>
> No, not unless you're willing to *pay* someone to spend time teaching you,
there's not enough time. 2 days left.
>
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Thomas Petazzoni
wrote:
> Maxime will reply to this in more details, but I believe the status is:
>
> * Interrupt controller is working.
> * Clock drivers are working.
> * Pinctrl is working.
> * GPIO is working.
> * Timer is working.
> * UART is working
> *
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:35 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:18:14PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
>> wrote:
>> > Luke Leighton on the other hand is demanding that we
>>
>> no demands have be
right - too many people contributed to this, input from jon smirl,
wookie, maxime, tomasz, henrik, i've made a start here and will
continue editing: this is notes for me to put forward an agenda for
discussion:
http://hands.com/~lkcl/allwinner_linux_proposal.txt
i'm setting a rule that each secti
Confused yes - innocent mistake - 50% yes.
I see now the posts are cc'd from arm-netbook mailing lists to many
other mailing lists with different standards for noise.
Apologies for not seeing that.
arm-netbook list 'belongs' to luke, but generally the noise level
is very low here and its aim is
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:18:14PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> wrote:
> > Luke Leighton on the other hand is demanding that we
>
> no demands have been made, russell: i've informed you of an immovable
> deadline which wi
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:02:03PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
> well, tough. get me up to speed, *fast*.
No, not unless you're willing to *pay* someone to spend time teaching you,
because you are asking to be *taught* about the current situation, so
you're asking someone to do some _work_ _for_
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:04:26PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > By demanding
>
> a-a-ah, no demands made.
" well, tough. get me up to speed, *fast*. please stop wasting time
like this: get me up to speed."
That is a demand. Stop tro
On Friday 07 of June 2013 20:02:03 luke.leighton wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Tomasz Figa
wrote:
> >Seeing from your posts you don't have any knowledge on how Linux kernel
> >
> > development works
>
> check back to 2004.
$ git log --oneline --author="Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton"
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:18:14PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> wrote:
> > Luke Leighton on the other hand is demanding that we
>
> no demands have been made, russell: i've informed you of an immovable
> deadline which wi
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Thomas Petazzoni
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, 7 Jun 2013 19:26:49 +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
>
>> > Have you noticed that it is already the case in mainline?
>>
>> i knew there was a little bit, but not the extent of the commits.
>
> Then you could probably use a b
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Wookey wrote:
> OK, this sounds good. Could you say who the allwinner engineers are?
[cross-over: i asked him if he'd be happy to let me know privately,
so i have at least some context when speaking to the Directors]
> I
> guess it's quite a large organisation, s
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> Luke,
>
> I want only one thing from you at this time. See below.
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 11:45 AM, luke.leighton
> wrote:
>> but the Directors of Allwinner aren't been kept in the loop,
>> here: that's my job, to get them up-to-
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> Luke Leighton on the other hand is demanding that we
no demands have been made, russell: i've informed you of an immovable
deadline which will pass beyond which the opportunity being presented
is lost.
> (Linux kernel
> developer
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>Seeing from your posts you don't have any knowledge on how Linux kernel
> development works
check back to 2004.
> and even on how Allwinner's cooperation with our
> community looks (and seem to be completely closed to our effort of showing
>
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 06 June 2013, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>> So yes, Allwinner has an evil vendor tree (c), with a solution similar yet
>> inferior (because not generic enough) to the device tree, but they show
>> interest on going down the mainline road
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Maxime Ripard
wrote:
> I should also add that Allwinner not only talked to us already,
oo! great! can you please [privately, not publicly] let me know who
that is, so i can let the Directors know, so that they can follow up?
> but also
> expressed interest in
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 8:13 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:54 PM, luke.leighton
>> wrote:
>>> augh. ok. solutions. what are the solutions here?
>>
>> Luke if you really want to fix this a good solution is to
Hello,
On Fri, 7 Jun 2013 19:26:49 +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
> > Have you noticed that it is already the case in mainline?
>
> i knew there was a little bit, but not the extent of the commits.
Then you could probably use a bit of your time to read the kernel
commit logs rather than writing h
+++ Maxime Ripard [2013-06-06 19:28 +0200]:
> Hi everyone,
>
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:00:00AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > Listen, Allwinner isn't working in a vacuum, believe it or not. I've
> > talked to them, so has Arnd and other people working on ARM, including
> > Maxime Ripard, who
Luke,
I want only one thing from you at this time. See below.
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 11:45 AM, luke.leighton wrote:
> but the Directors of Allwinner aren't been kept in the loop,
> here: that's my job, to get them up-to-speed.
The one job I would love for you to do instead of all this tr
thomas i _very_ briefly spotted this when i was extremely busy
yesterday, and i'm grateful to the 2 or 3 people who've given me the
keywords and/or links to catch up.
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Thomas Petazzoni
wrote:
> Dear Tomasz Figa,
>
> On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 02:01:14 +0200, Tomasz Figa w
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 02:49:28PM +, joem wrote:
> > > SoC vendors are free to join the discussion, and many SoC vendors are part
> > > of the kernel community, so calling this unilateral is plain wrong.
> >
> > you're free to believe that, vladimir. i've explained why that
> > hasn't happe
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Alexandre Belloni
wrote:
> On 07/06/2013 10:06, luke.leighton wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Vladimir Pantelic wrote:
>>> luke.leighton wrote:
3 days remaining on the clock.
>>>
>>> what catastrophic thing will happen when the time runs out?
>> n
On 06/07/2013 02:02 AM, luke.leighton wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> wrote:
>
>> If companies are going to go off and invent the square wheel, and that
>> makes *them* suffer the loss of being able to merge back into the
>> mainline kernel, thereby making *the
+++ Lennart Sorensen [2013-06-07 11:46 -0400]:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 04:34:00PM +0100, Wookey wrote:
> > +++ Lennart Sorensen [2013-06-07 10:55 -0400]:
> >
> > > and anything using the horrors
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 04:34:00PM +0100, Wookey wrote:
> This is generally correct, but increasingly the base package set is
> set up to cross-build. Some work is still needed on merging the
> relevant fixes from ubuntu, and sorting out the cross-compiler setup
> situation, but we're getting there
+++ Lennart Sorensen [2013-06-07 10:55 -0400]:
> Debian in general does NOT cross compile.
> Cross compiling is error prone and often makefiles are not set up for it
This is generally correct, but increasingly the base package set is
set up to cross-build. Some work is still needed on merging t
> > SoC vendors are free to join the discussion, and many SoC vendors are part
> > of the kernel community, so calling this unilateral is plain wrong.
>
> you're free to believe that, vladimir. i've explained why that
> hasn't happened, in prior messages. can we move forward, please?
I prefer
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 10:01:05AM +0100, Andree Tago wrote:
> hello,
>
> i want cross-compile pango for amr , my configuration is :
>
> export
> FONTCONFIG_CFLAGS="-I/home/achouri/pfe/sortie/libpango/fontconfig/font/include"
> export
> FONTCONFIG_LIBS="-L/home/achouri/pfe/sortie/libpango/fontcon
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:52:43AM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
> coming back to what you said earlier: i'm formulating what to say to
> allwinner [and need to pre-send something by monday so that they can
> consider it before the meeting]. so far, it consists of:
>
> * device-tree is what the li
+++ Andree Tago [2013-06-07 10:01 +0100]:
>hello,
>i want cross-compile pango for arm , my configuration is :
>export
>
> FONTCONFIG_CFLAGS="-I/home/achouri/pfe/sortie/libpango/fontconfig/font/include"
>export
>FONTCONFIG_LIBS="-L/home/achouri/pfe/sortie/libpango/fontconfig/
Tomasz Figa
writes:
> Seeing from your posts you don't have any knowledge on how Linux kernel
> development works and even on how Allwinner's cooperation with our
> community looks (and seem to be completely closed to our effort of showing
> you the reality), so I'm not sure if you are the rig
fre 2013-06-07 klockan 09:02 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
> ok. so. we come back to the question again: what shall i propose to
> them that they consider doing, and what benefit would it be to them to
> do so?
Just tell them that the kernel is moving to a different configuration
syntax called De
2013/6/7 Olof Johansson :
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 8:13 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:54 PM, luke.leighton
>> wrote:
>>> augh. ok. solutions. what are the solutions here?
>>
>> Luke if you really want to fix this a good solution is to have
>> Allwinner join Linaro
Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 01:24:57PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
I don't see any other solution here than moving all the Allwinner code to
DT (as it has been suggested in this thread several times already), as
th
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 09:48:22AM +0200, Vladimir Pantelic wrote:
> luke.leighton wrote:
>> 3 days remaining on the clock.
>
> what catastrophic thing will happen when the time runs out?
Maybe the world will explode into tiny small bits? Probably not. I
suspect nothing of any relevance to us.
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 10:40:37AM +0200, Vladimir Pantelic wrote:
> luke.leighton wrote:> so.
> >
> > coming back to what you said earlier: i'm formulating what to say to
> > allwinner [and need to pre-send something by monday so that they can
> > consider it before the meeting]. so far, it c
hello,
i want cross-compile pango for amr , my configuration is :
export
FONTCONFIG_CFLAGS="-I/home/achouri/pfe/sortie/libpango/fontconfig/font/include"
export
FONTCONFIG_LIBS="-L/home/achouri/pfe/sortie/libpango/fontconfig/font/lib"
export
FREETYPE_CFLAGS="-I/home/achouri/pfe/sortie/libpango/fre
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 09:02:43AM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
> ok. so. we come back to the question again: what shall i propose to
> them that they consider doing, and what benefit would it be to them to
> do so?
>
> i cannot go to them and say "you have to do this [insert proposal
> here]"
luke.leighton wrote:> so.
>
> coming back to what you said earlier: i'm formulating what to say to
> allwinner [and need to pre-send something by monday so that they can
> consider it before the meeting]. so far, it consists of:
>
> * device-tree is what the linux kernel community has come up
On 07/06/2013 10:06, luke.leighton wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Vladimir Pantelic wrote:
>> luke.leighton wrote:
>>> 3 days remaining on the clock.
>>
>> what catastrophic thing will happen when the time runs out?
> no catastrophe, vladimir: all that happens is that an opportunity i
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Vladimir Pantelic wrote:
> luke.leighton wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Vladimir Pantelic
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 4 days? WTF? since when did setting an ultimatum to the kernel
>>> community work?
>>
>>
>> i was only informed of the opportunity 2 days ago,
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> If companies are going to go off and invent the square wheel, and that
> makes *them* suffer the loss of being able to merge back into the
> mainline kernel, thereby making *their* job of moving forward with
> their kernel versions
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> On Thursday 06 of June 2013 13:49:38 luke.leighton wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Tomasz Figa
> wrote:
>> > Luke,
>> >
>> > On Thursday 06 of June 2013 13:24:57 luke.leighton wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Tomasz Figa
luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Vladimir Pantelic wrote:
4 days? WTF? since when did setting an ultimatum to the kernel
community work?
i was only informed of the opportunity 2 days ago, vladimir. this is
an important meeting. of course the linux kernel community is
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Vladimir Pantelic wrote:
> 4 days? WTF? since when did setting an ultimatum to the kernel
> community work?
i was only informed of the opportunity 2 days ago, vladimir. this is
an important meeting. of course the linux kernel community is
entirely free to:
* c
52 matches
Mail list logo
