Hi,
On 12/15/2010 09:28 AM, Paul Li wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> If I want to build the system from scratch, what should I do? I
> mean, where to get the deb binary packages of Linaro? Where to get the
> image creator tool? etc. thank you.
>
>
> B.R
>
> Paul
Did you manage to build a Lina
Hi,
Due to the holiday season many key people are on vacation at the moment.
For this reason the weekly Release Meeting has been cancelled. The next
meeting will be Wednesday 5th January 2010.
Regards,
Jamie.
--
Linaro Release Manager
___
linaro-dev
On 22 December 2010 09:51, Matt Sealey wrote:
> Okay I hereby refrain from legal comments.
>
> In any case, this code has passed legal at Freescale and AMD *AND*
> Qualcomm. It would not be GPL if it has not been vetted (and it took
> them a year to get to this point).
It appears that this discus
Konstantinos,
thanks, I agree with your thoughts. My approach has been to accept
small steps in the right direction and encourage reasoned discussion. I also
think that Linaro's main function is as a place where all the moving parts can
collaborate.Right now, the GPU 'problem' is
You need to read before replying.
If the interface is a generic interface that any software can use then
its fine, when the interface is a specific interface for a specific
closed userspace driver it becomes questionable.
Again you are thinking general case when we are talking specifics.
thank
you have two pieces of code, a userspace 3D *driver* (not
application), and a kernel driver talking to the hw, if the userspace
3D driver cannot exist without the kernel driver, it could very well
be considered a derivative work of the kernel driver. You are not
protected by the standard Linux sys
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010, David Rusling wrote:
> Now for a bit of a rant. Personally, I have a deep and abiding
> respect for open source (for me, it's the key social invention of the
> internet age), however I also recognise that it would not exist
> without companies using open source as pa
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Nicolas Pitre
wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2010, David Rusling wrote:
>
>> Now for a bit of a rant. Personally, I have a deep and abiding
>> respect for open source (for me, it's the key social invention of the
>> internet age), however I also recognise that it
Hi Robert,
I don't know if Paul was successful but I do "build systems" from the
linaro/ubuntu packages so I suspect I can probably be of some
assistance.
This might be something better discussed interactively rather than via
email but either way. You might want to join #linaro on
irc.freenode.ne
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010, Tom Gall wrote:
> The very important part of this whole discussion is getting arm Linux and it's
> 3d driver situation so it TOO is the best.
>
> Right now it's not and pointing to other elements of the system and saying
> "it's great" is besides the point.
My whole point, i
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 6:02 AM, Konstantinos Margaritis
wrote:
> On 22 December 2010 09:51, Matt Sealey wrote:
>> Okay I hereby refrain from legal comments.
>>
>> In any case, this code has passed legal at Freescale and AMD *AND*
>> Qualcomm. It would not be GPL if it has not been vetted (and it
On 22 December 2010 20:39, Piotr Gluszenia Slawinski
wrote:
>> So to say that the corporate world might need to consider Open Source to
>> be competitive and survive, but the reverse is not true i.e. Open Source
>> doesn't _require_ the corporate world to survive.
>
> i agree with it fully, and to
So to say that the corporate world might need to consider Open Source to
be competitive and survive, but the reverse is not true i.e. Open Source
doesn't _require_ the corporate world to survive.
i agree with it fully, and to support this claim i want to remind the
simple rule of capital accumul
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> On 22 December 2010 20:39, Piotr Gluszenia Slawinski
> wrote:
> >> So to say that the corporate world might need to consider Open Source to
> >> be competitive and survive, but the reverse is not true i.e. Open Source
> >> doesn't _require_ th
On 22 December 2010 21:22, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> Having accommodations in the kernel for proprietary drivers is not a
> mutual benefit anymore. That might be hard to understand from your
> point of view, but the incentives in the Open Source communities aren't
> based on commercial results.
DIS
>
> I'm not advocating that closed source drivers be included in the
> kernel, but IMHO,
> having an open kernel-space driver would also help the reverse engineering
> process at the same time as allowing common users as well as developers to
> use and test any 3D applications -don't forget that 3D
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> On 22 December 2010 21:22, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > Having accommodations in the kernel for proprietary drivers is not a
> > mutual benefit anymore. That might be hard to understand from your
> > point of view, but the incentives in the Open
On Thu, 23 Dec 2010, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> Le mercredi 22 décembre 2010 à 15:29 -0500, Nicolas Pitre a écrit :
> > It is
> > not economically viable for the Open Source community to accommodate
> > proprietary drivers, irrespective of how loud you might advocate for
> > that.
>
> I think you
Hello Everyone,
The minutes of the weekly call can be found at:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/PowerManagement/Meetings/2010-12-22
Attendees: Vishwa, Torez, Vincent, Yong
Regards,
Vishwa
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
ht
19 matches
Mail list logo
