On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 05:54:36PM -0600, Connie Sieh wrote: > On Mon, 10 Dec 2012, Konstantin Olchanski wrote: > > >On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 05:17:06PM -0800, Joseph Areeda wrote: > >>I'm pretty sure there are Debian ports for ARM including RasberryPi. > > > > > >I am more interested in getting the SL userland running on the ARM machines. > > > > There is a RHEL 6 rebuild for "arm" called RedSleeve. > http://www.redsleeve.org . > Yes, thanks. One difficulty I expect is with no "cross-install" capability when I can use a 2nd computer (x86) to "cross-install" ARM RPMs into an ARM boot media. If you do frequent cross-compilation, you would agree with me that lack of cross-install is so silly. I think the expectation is that I have an ARM machine big enough to run the SL installer. At least the text-mode installation is still there and there is no requirement of a working ARM X11 server on whatever funny ARM machine I happen to have. K.O. > -Connie Sieh > > > > >K.O. > > > > > > > > > >> > >>Here's an interesting project out of the UK > >>http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~sjc/raspberrypi/ where the guy built a > >>64 node cluster using Lego for the supports. > >> > >>I'm also sure it was a lot of work like others have mentioned. > >> > >>Perhaps when the upstream providers get the kernel and the drivers > >>going in the Fedora and RedHat branches we'll see SL7 or 8 available > >>for ARM also. > >> > >>Joe > >> > >>On 12/07/2012 11:27 AM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote: > >>>Please do not confuse 3 separate issues: > >>> > >>>1) Linux userland: this is pretty much universal and will > >>> run on any CPU as long as you have a cross-compiler > >>> and as long as the "autoconf" tools do not try too hard > >>> to prevent you from cross-compiling the stuff. > >>> > >>>2) Linux kernel: is also pretty much universal and assumes > >>> very little about the CPU. There *is* some assembly code > >>> that needs to be ported when you move between CPUs (say > >>> from hypothetical SuperARM to hypothetical HyperARM). I believe > >>> current versions of Linux kernel have this support for > >>> all existing ARM CPU variations. > >>> > >>>3) Linux device drivers: in the PC world devices are standardized > >>> around the PCI bus architecture (from the CPU, PCIe looks like PCI, > >>> on purpose) and most devices drivers are universal, so if you > >>> have a PCI/PCIe based ARM machine with PC-type peripherals ("South Bridge", > >>> ethernet, video, etc), you are good to go. If you have an ARM machine > >>> with strange devices (i.e. the RaspberryPI), you have to wait > >>> for the manufacturer to release the specs, then you can write > >>> the drivers, then you can run Linux. Rinse, repeat for the next > >>> revision of the CPU ASIC (because they moved the registers around > >>> or used a slightly different ethernet block). It helps if you have > >>> some standardized interfaces, for example on the RaspberryPI you have > >>> standard USB, so you can use "all supported" USB-Wifi adapters right away. > >>> > >>>4) boot loader: is different for each type of machine, each type > >>> of boot device media. period. (Even on PCs there is no longer any > >>> standard standard - some use old-school BIOS booting, others use EFI boot, > >>> some need BIOS/ACPI help, some do not). > >>> > >>>This makes it 4 issues, if you count the first (linux userland) non-issue. > >>> > >>> > >>>K.O. > >>> > >>> > >>>On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 01:01:36PM -0600, SLtryer wrote: > >>>>On 10/23/2012 12:37 PM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote: > >>>>>An "ARM platform" does not exist. > >>>>> > >>>>>Unlike the "PC platform" where "PC hardware" is highly standardized > >>>>>and almost any OS can run on almost any vendor hardware, > >>>>>the "ARM platform" is more like the early Linux days where instead > >>>>>of 3 video card makers there were 23 of them, all incompatible, > >>>>>all without Linux drivers. If you had the "wrong" video card, > >>>>>too bad, no soup for you. > >>>>> > >>>>>In the ARM world, there is a zoo of different ARM processors, > >>>>>all incompatible with each other (think as if each Android device > >>>>>had a random CPU - a 16-bit i8086, or a 32-bit i386, or a 64-bit i7 - > >>>>>the variation in capabilities is that high). > >>>>> > >>>>>Then each device contains random i/o chips connected in it's own > >>>>>special way - there is no PCI/PCIe bus where everything is standardized. > >>>>>There are several WiFi chips, several Bluetooth, USB, etc chips. Some > >>>>>have Linux drivers, some do not. > >>>>> > >>>>>As result, there is no generic Linux that will run on every ARM machine. > >>>>Not to be argumentative, but I always believed that the advantage of > >>>>*nix* was that it could be ported to numerous platforms, regardless > >>>>of hardware. You even mention the "early Linux days," when there > >>>>was little or no standardization of PC hardware. Yet, the platform > >>>>didn't disappear from use simply because there might have been > >>>>porting issues, most of which were caused more by proprietary > >>>>secrets and hardware defects than the ever-present fact of diversity > >>>>of hardware. > >>>> > >>>>But one could make the same argument even today: That there are > >>>>many different CPU platforms, e.g., and that they are not > >>>>standardized. One example I am thinking of is the Intel v. Amdahl > >>>>CPU compatibility issue. Even though most of the Linux system will > >>>>run on either without modification, there are still some unique > >>>>issues to each of them; from having worked and studied VirtualBox, > >>>>there are differences in how each manufacturer chose to implement > >>>>the ring structure that permits virtualization to work as nicely as > >>>>it does on these platforms. For the most part, they are compatible, > >>>>but the kernel developers have to be aware of certain implemention > >>>>issues, including a bug in the Intel CPU platform that requires a > >>>>VirtualBox workaround (for optimizing the code or something; I > >>>>forget). > >>>> > >>>>And this is in addition to Linux supporting umpteen different > >>>>processing platforms besides the x86 types. New hardware appears > >>>>constantly, and some Linux user somewhere wants to use it on their > >>>>system. I feel that variety of hardware and variation in hardware > >>>>implementation is a fact, and a main reason why Linux and Unix are > >>>>so powerful and ubiquitous. > >>>> > >>>>Now I just hope no one will hold me to this and insist that I > >>>>actually port Linux to all these different hardware configuration! > >>>>I'm not signing up; I'm just pointing out what I think is reality. > > > > -- Konstantin Olchanski Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow! Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, Canada