OK, I will do that.
Best regards,
Nobuhiro
2013/5/7 Ben Hutchings :
> I've updated the trunk branch in svn for Linux 3.9, so please go ahead
> with this.
>
> Ben.
>
> --
> Ben Hutchings
> If God had intended Man to program,
> we'd have been born with serial I/O ports.
--
Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
I've updated the trunk branch in svn for Linux 3.9, so please go ahead
with this.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
If God had intended Man to program,
we'd have been born with serial I/O ports.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Hector Oron wrote:
> Hello,
>
> 2013/4/2 Nobuhiro Iwamatsu :
>
>> Then, the two candidates have come armmp and armv7.
>> Which do you like?
>> if there is no other opinions, I would want to decide on armmp.
>
> armmp ++
Thanks!
--
Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
iwamatsu
Hello,
2013/4/2 Nobuhiro Iwamatsu :
> Then, the two candidates have come armmp and armv7.
> Which do you like?
> if there is no other opinions, I would want to decide on armmp.
armmp ++
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble
Hi, all.
Now, we are trying to determine the MP flavor of ARM in Debian.
Then, the two candidates have come armmp and armv7.
Which do you like?
if there is no other opinions, I would want to decide on armmp.
Best,
Nobuhiro
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Lennart Sorensen
wrote:
> On Thu, Ma
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 08:42:49AM +, Tixy wrote:
> A single multiplatform kernel can support both armv6 and armv7 (or armv4
> + armv5). I don't know if Debian plans to have separate versions for
> each architecture version - there may be performance benefits to this -
> in which case using arm
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 12:52 +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 15:05 +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >
> >> I think the question here is what the `uname -r` bit should be.
> >> Specifically the $FLAVOUR in 3.x.y-z-$F
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 15:05 +, Ian Campbell wrote:
>
>> I think the question here is what the `uname -r` bit should be.
>> Specifically the $FLAVOUR in 3.x.y-z-$FLAVOUR.
>
> Woops, I missed that uname -r includes the flavour bit.
>
>> I
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 08:44 +0100, Arnaud Patard wrote:
>> I already commented some days ago on debian-arm that currently
>> multiplatform support must wait. It is useless as usb support is
>> _broken_ on multiplatform. Hopefully, Linaro devs
On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 15:05 +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> I think the question here is what the `uname -r` bit should be.
> Specifically the $FLAVOUR in 3.x.y-z-$FLAVOUR.
Woops, I missed that uname -r includes the flavour bit.
> I think there is an argument for making the multiplatform case be th
On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 16:13 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
> > I would much prefer a name that will provide a more useful distinction
> > in future (and not be too long!). Perhaps it should refer to the CPU
> > requirement like the flavours for s
On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 08:03 +, Tixy wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 03:46 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 08:41 +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Ben Hutchings
> > > wrote:
> > [...]
>
> > > > In future all ARM kernels should be mult
On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 08:44 +0100, Arnaud Patard wrote:
> I already commented some days ago on debian-arm that currently
> multiplatform support must wait. It is useless as usb support is
> _broken_ on multiplatform. Hopefully, Linaro devs seem back to work
> and looks like we may have a patch merg
On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 03:46 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 08:41 +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Ben Hutchings
> > wrote:
> [...]
> > > In future all ARM kernels should be multi-platform, but I expect there
> > > will still be different
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I would much prefer a name that will provide a more useful distinction
> in future (and not be too long!). Perhaps it should refer to the CPU
> requirement like the flavours for some other architectures.
How about the same scheme as on othe
Ben Hutchings writes:
Hi,
> On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 08:41 +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thank you for your comment.
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> > On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 08:35 +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
>> >> Package: linux
>> >> Version: 3.
On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 08:41 +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for your comment.
>
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 08:35 +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> >> Package: linux
> >> Version: 3.8.2-1~experimental.1
> >> Severity: wis
Hi,
Thank you for your comment.
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 08:35 +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
>> Package: linux
>> Version: 3.8.2-1~experimental.1
>> Severity: wishlist
>> Tags: patch
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> >From linux 3.8, support of armada 370/xp
On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 08:35 +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> Package: linux
> Version: 3.8.2-1~experimental.1
> Severity: wishlist
> Tags: patch
>
> Hi,
>
> >From linux 3.8, support of armada 370/xp was added in arm.
> This is classified into the armhf architecture of debian.
> First I began and
Package: linux
Version: 3.8.2-1~experimental.1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Hi,
>From linux 3.8, support of armada 370/xp was added in arm.
This is classified into the armhf architecture of debian.
First I began and thought that an armada flavor would be added.
When I consulted about this in de
20 matches
Mail list logo
