Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.raspberry-pi > #38021 > unrolled thread

Pi PICO W on batteries

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.raspberry-pi

Contents

  Pi PICO W on batteries The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-14 12:17 +0100
    Re: Pi PICO W on batteries rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 17:48 +0000
      Re: Pi PICO W on batteries The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-15 12:31 +0100
        Re: Pi PICO W on batteries John R Walliker <jrwalliker@gmail.com> - 2026-06-15 13:04 +0100
          Re: Pi PICO W on batteries The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-15 13:17 +0100
        Re: Pi PICO W on batteries "Peter Heitzer" <peter.heitzer@rz.uni-regensburg.de> - 2026-06-15 12:06 +0000
          Re: Pi PICO W on batteries The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-15 13:19 +0100
            Re: Pi PICO W on batteries "Peter Heitzer" <peter.heitzer@rz.uni-regensburg.de> - 2026-06-15 13:58 +0000
              Re: Pi PICO W on batteries The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-15 16:52 +0100
      Re: Pi PICO W on batteries mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2026-06-15 12:52 +0100
    Re: Pi PICO W on batteries Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> - 2026-06-15 19:49 +0100
      Re: Pi PICO W on batteries The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-15 20:28 +0100
        Re: Pi PICO W on batteries Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2026-06-15 20:54 +0100
          Re: Pi PICO W on batteries The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-16 01:59 +0100
        Re: Pi PICO W on batteries Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2026-06-24 09:33 +0300
          Re: Pi PICO W on batteries The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-24 09:58 +0100
          Re: Pi PICO W on batteries Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2026-06-24 13:41 +0100
            Re: Pi PICO W on batteries The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-24 13:53 +0100
            Re: Pi PICO W on batteries "Peter Heitzer" <peter.heitzer@rz.uni-regensburg.de> - 2026-06-24 14:51 +0000
              Re: Pi PICO W on batteries The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-24 16:41 +0100
                Re: Pi PICO W on batteries wmartin <wwm@wwmartin.net> - 2026-06-24 20:35 -0700
                  Re: Pi PICO W on batteries John R Walliker <jrwalliker@gmail.com> - 2026-06-25 09:21 +0100
                  Re: Pi PICO W on batteries The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-25 10:12 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#38021 — Pi PICO W on batteries

The process of debugging my remote oil level sensor continues. This is 
based on a PICO W plus a nano timer to wake it up every couple of hours 
to send a message via the home wifi.

After an issue in which it stayed woke, and flattened its battery and 
never sent any data, the code has been modified and its back on the tank 
  after extensive testing, with three *lithium* batteries.

I was unaware of lithium primary cells in an AA format till now. But 
three of these start out at 5,2V and stick around 5V for a long time. 
Perfect for the unit.

In addition they are reckoned to be more tolerant of the cold and to 
last twice as long.

Early days, but if anyone is thinking of battery powering a PICO outside 
for intermittent use,  a nano timer and lithium primary cells looks to 
be the best technology.


-- 
Any fool can believe in principles -  and most of them do!

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#38022

On Sun, 14 Jun 2026 12:17:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Early days, but if anyone is thinking of battery powering a PICO outside
> for intermittent use,  a nano timer and lithium primary cells looks to
> be the best technology.

Why not 18650s? 2 would give you a little over 7V and battery holders 
similar to the AA types are available. The TP4056 charging modules are 
inexpensive if you want to incorporate USB charging. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38025

On 14/06/2026 18:48, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jun 2026 12:17:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
>> Early days, but if anyone is thinking of battery powering a PICO outside
>> for intermittent use,  a nano timer and lithium primary cells looks to
>> be the best technology.
> 
> Why not 18650s? 2 would give you a little over 7V

"The maximum recommended input voltage for a Raspberry Pi Pico or Pico W 
is 5.5V. Powering the board above 6.0V will permanently damage the 
onboard voltage regulator"

> and battery holders
> similar to the AA types are available. The TP4056 charging modules are
> inexpensive if you want to incorporate USB charging.

-- 
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38027

On 15/06/2026 12:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 14/06/2026 18:48, rbowman wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2026 12:17:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> Early days, but if anyone is thinking of battery powering a PICO outside
>>> for intermittent use,  a nano timer and lithium primary cells looks to
>>> be the best technology.
>>
>> Why not 18650s? 2 would give you a little over 7V
> 
> "The maximum recommended input voltage for a Raspberry Pi Pico or Pico W 
> is 5.5V. Powering the board above 6.0V will permanently damage the 
> onboard voltage regulator"
> 
>> and battery holders
>> similar to the AA types are available. The TP4056 charging modules are
>> inexpensive if you want to incorporate USB charging.

The Energizer lithium primary cells are a lithium iron sulphide
technology.  I have measured the cell voltages of about 20 new
cells and found them all to be between 1.800V and 1.805V open
circuit.  This would make them completely safe for this usage.
They maintain a voltage above 1.5V for much of the discharge
curve and most importantly they are unlikely to leak.
John

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38029

On 15/06/2026 13:04, John R Walliker wrote:
> On 15/06/2026 12:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 14/06/2026 18:48, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2026 12:17:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Early days, but if anyone is thinking of battery powering a PICO 
>>>> outside
>>>> for intermittent use,  a nano timer and lithium primary cells looks to
>>>> be the best technology.
>>>
>>> Why not 18650s? 2 would give you a little over 7V
>>
>> "The maximum recommended input voltage for a Raspberry Pi Pico or Pico 
>> W is 5.5V. Powering the board above 6.0V will permanently damage the 
>> onboard voltage regulator"
>>
>>> and battery holders
>>> similar to the AA types are available. The TP4056 charging modules are
>>> inexpensive if you want to incorporate USB charging.
> 
> The Energizer lithium primary cells are a lithium iron sulphide
> technology.  I have measured the cell voltages of about 20 new
> cells and found them all to be between 1.800V and 1.805V open
> circuit.  This would make them completely safe for this usage.
> They maintain a voltage above 1.5V for much of the discharge
> curve and most importantly they are unlikely to leak.
> John
> 
Exactly. I have lithium ion polymer cells coming out of my ears, but one 
cell is too low and two cells are too high.

This technology is higher voltage, greater capacity, and better 
performance over the discharge curve and in heat and cold than alkaline 
cells.
I estimate over a years life.

Which is good because its a ladder climb to access the unit.

-- 
"If you don’t read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the 
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38028

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>On 14/06/2026 18:48, rbowman wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2026 12:17:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> 
>>> Early days, but if anyone is thinking of battery powering a PICO outside
>>> for intermittent use,  a nano timer and lithium primary cells looks to
>>> be the best technology.
>> 
>> Why not 18650s? 2 would give you a little over 7V
>
>"The maximum recommended input voltage for a Raspberry Pi Pico or Pico W 
>is 5.5V. Powering the board above 6.0V will permanently damage the 
>onboard voltage regulator"

One cell should be sufficient for powering the Pico. The regulator
lower limit is 2.3 V so there is a need for deep discharge protection
on the cell.


-- 
Dipl.-Inform(FH) Peter Heitzer, peter.heitzer@rz.uni-regensburg.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38030

On 15/06/2026 13:06, Peter Heitzer wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 14/06/2026 18:48, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2026 12:17:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Early days, but if anyone is thinking of battery powering a PICO outside
>>>> for intermittent use,  a nano timer and lithium primary cells looks to
>>>> be the best technology.
>>>
>>> Why not 18650s? 2 would give you a little over 7V
>>
>> "The maximum recommended input voltage for a Raspberry Pi Pico or Pico W
>> is 5.5V. Powering the board above 6.0V will permanently damage the
>> onboard voltage regulator"
> 
> One cell should be sufficient for powering the Pico. The regulator
> lower limit is 2.3 V so there is a need for deep discharge protection
> on the cell.
> 
I bench tested the device., Its not just a pico W. There is an 
ultrasonic device in there as well.

It stared to fail  around 4V.

> 

-- 
"And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch".

Gospel of St. Mathew 15:14

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38031

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>On 15/06/2026 13:06, Peter Heitzer wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 14/06/2026 18:48, rbowman wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2026 12:17:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Early days, but if anyone is thinking of battery powering a PICO outside
>>>>> for intermittent use,  a nano timer and lithium primary cells looks to
>>>>> be the best technology.
>>>>
>>>> Why not 18650s? 2 would give you a little over 7V
>>>
>>> "The maximum recommended input voltage for a Raspberry Pi Pico or Pico W
>>> is 5.5V. Powering the board above 6.0V will permanently damage the
>>> onboard voltage regulator"
>> 
>> One cell should be sufficient for powering the Pico. The regulator
>> lower limit is 2.3 V so there is a need for deep discharge protection
>> on the cell.
>> 
>I bench tested the device., Its not just a pico W. There is an 
>ultrasonic device in there as well.
>
>It stared to fail  around 4V.
Then two 18650 in serial and a 5V switching regulator should do the
job. Perhaps a small USB powerbank may also work if you find one
that does not shut off if the consumed current it to low.


-- 
Dipl.-Inform(FH) Peter Heitzer, peter.heitzer@rz.uni-regensburg.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38032

On 15/06/2026 14:58, Peter Heitzer wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 15/06/2026 13:06, Peter Heitzer wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 14/06/2026 18:48, rbowman wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2026 12:17:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Early days, but if anyone is thinking of battery powering a PICO outside
>>>>>> for intermittent use,  a nano timer and lithium primary cells looks to
>>>>>> be the best technology.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why not 18650s? 2 would give you a little over 7V
>>>>
>>>> "The maximum recommended input voltage for a Raspberry Pi Pico or Pico W
>>>> is 5.5V. Powering the board above 6.0V will permanently damage the
>>>> onboard voltage regulator"
>>>
>>> One cell should be sufficient for powering the Pico. The regulator
>>> lower limit is 2.3 V so there is a need for deep discharge protection
>>> on the cell.
>>>
>> I bench tested the device., Its not just a pico W. There is an
>> ultrasonic device in there as well.
>>
>> It stared to fail  around 4V.
> Then two 18650 in serial and a 5V switching regulator should do the
> job.
Sigh,

The nano power switch  will not handle that voltage
Putting  a regulator in front negates the point of having a nano power 
switch,

> Perhaps a small USB powerbank may also work if you find one
> that does not shut off if the consumed current it to low.
> 
> 
Or drain the power in a month...

Sheesh. Why do some people always think they know better?

"I have examined, X,Y,Z,A ,B and C I found Q to be optimal"
"Why didn't you use A B or C?"
"
-- 
Climate is what you expect but weather is what you get.
Mark Twain

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38026

On 14/06/2026 18:48, rbowman wrote:
> Why not 18650s?

I've been using Li-Ion rechargeables from disposed vapes to power many 
battery devices. Although the supply has dried up now, I managed to 
collect over 100 3.7V 500mAh, 550mAh, 1400mAh and 1800mAhr cells when 
out walking the dog.

You still find such vapes but rare now. You do find rechargeable vapes 
now and then and can recover the USB rechargers from them to use with 
previously recovered batteries. Rechargeables are normally disposed 
because the battery is dead. All the chargers have been fine.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38033

On 14/06/2026 12:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> The process of debugging my remote oil level sensor continues. This is 
> based on a PICO W plus a nano timer to wake it up every couple of hours 
> to send a message via the home wifi.
nano timer ??

What's that then?

-- 
Brian Gregory (in England).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38034

On 15/06/2026 19:49, Brian Gregory wrote:
> On 14/06/2026 12:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> The process of debugging my remote oil level sensor continues. This is 
>> based on a PICO W plus a nano timer to wake it up every couple of 
>> hours to send a message via the home wifi.
> nano timer ??
> 
> What's that then?

TPL5100

https://www.ti.com/product/TPL5110


-- 
Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 
twenty-first century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a 
globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, 
on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer 
projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to 
contemplate a rollback of the industrial age.

Richard Lindzen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38035

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 15/06/2026 19:49, Brian Gregory wrote:
> > On 14/06/2026 12:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> >> The process of debugging my remote oil level sensor continues. This is 
> >> based on a PICO W plus a nano timer to wake it up every couple of 
> >> hours to send a message via the home wifi.
> > nano timer ??
> > 
> > What's that then?
> 
> TPL5100
> 
> https://www.ti.com/product/TPL5110

It's disappointing that it's not available in a higher voltage version
since, as you say, it needs to be directly connected to the battery.

I suppose one workaround would be to use a single lithium ion cell to give
you down to 3V and then a boost converter which you only run when the
CPU is operating.  Timer goes off, boost converter spins up to power your
CPU at a stable 5V (or whatever), then CPU tells it shut off again once
done.

That's likely going to take more power than just running directly off
battery, but the flipside is you can install several 18650 cells in parallel
if you want to get more capacity.

The primary lithium AAs aren't a terrible option though, especially if you
are more likely to be killed by self-discharge of the battery than by your
own load.

Theo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38037

On 15/06/2026 20:54, Theo wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 15/06/2026 19:49, Brian Gregory wrote:
>>> On 14/06/2026 12:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> The process of debugging my remote oil level sensor continues. This is
>>>> based on a PICO W plus a nano timer to wake it up every couple of
>>>> hours to send a message via the home wifi.
>>> nano timer ??
>>>
>>> What's that then?
>>
>> TPL5100
>>
>> https://www.ti.com/product/TPL5110
> 
> It's disappointing that it's not available in a higher voltage version
> since, as you say, it needs to be directly connected to the battery.
> 
> I suppose one workaround would be to use a single lithium ion cell to give
> you down to 3V and then a boost converter which you only run when the
> CPU is operating.  Timer goes off, boost converter spins up to power your
> CPU at a stable 5V (or whatever), then CPU tells it shut off again once
> done.
> 
One workaround is to use 3 lithium primary batteries,.

> That's likely going to take more power than just running directly off
> battery, but the flipside is you can install several 18650 cells in parallel
> if you want to get more capacity.
> 
The primary lithium cells have more capacity. Better temperature 
response. Better discharge curve.

> The primary lithium AAs aren't a terrible option though, especially if you
> are more likely to be killed by self-discharge of the battery than by your
> own load.
> 
They are, having exhausted all other alternatives, by far and away the 
best option.
This design took nearly 3 years from idea to completion, and this is the 
optimal solution

The ultrasonics have no voltage regulation. Just very high voltages to 
drive them Over 20V. They fail if they don't get at least 3.9V input


> Theo

-- 
  “A leader is best When people barely know he exists. Of a good leader, 
who talks little,When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,They will say, 
“We did this ourselves.”

― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38069

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:

> On 15/06/2026 19:49, Brian Gregory wrote:
>> nano timer ??
>> What's that then?
>
> TPL5100
>
> https://www.ti.com/product/TPL5110

I kinda thought modern microcontrollers have this sort of thing built
in? Oh, looks like the Pico (no W) draws 2 mA in "deep sleep" and this
timer draws 35 nA. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38070

On 24/06/2026 07:33, Anssi Saari wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
> 
>> On 15/06/2026 19:49, Brian Gregory wrote:
>>> nano timer ??
>>> What's that then?
>>
>> TPL5100
>>
>> https://www.ti.com/product/TPL5110
> 
> I kinda thought modern microcontrollers have this sort of thing built
> in? Oh, looks like the Pico (no W) draws 2 mA in "deep sleep" and this
> timer draws 35 nA.

Yes.

Plus there is the advantage that you get a complete reboot every time 
things fire up.

And its very very simple. Drive pico  pin high. get power cut.


-- 
Canada is all right really, though not for the whole weekend.

"Saki"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38072

Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
> 
> > On 15/06/2026 19:49, Brian Gregory wrote:
> >> nano timer ??
> >> What's that then?
> >
> > TPL5100
> >
> > https://www.ti.com/product/TPL5110
> 
> I kinda thought modern microcontrollers have this sort of thing built
> in? Oh, looks like the Pico (no W) draws 2 mA in "deep sleep" and this
> timer draws 35 nA. 

That does sound surprisingly bad for the Pico.  Seems that the RP2040 is
0.18mA in 'dormant' (ie deep sleep) and 0.38mA in 'sleep', which is a bit
better.  So must be something else on the Pico that's not so good in sleep
mode.

If you've got other stuff hung off the MCU that isn't super low power,
you're going to have to power-gate it anyway, in which case the nano timer
will do that at the same time.

Theo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38074

On 24/06/2026 13:41, Theo wrote:
> Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> On 15/06/2026 19:49, Brian Gregory wrote:
>>>> nano timer ??
>>>> What's that then?
>>>
>>> TPL5100
>>>
>>> https://www.ti.com/product/TPL5110
>>
>> I kinda thought modern microcontrollers have this sort of thing built
>> in? Oh, looks like the Pico (no W) draws 2 mA in "deep sleep" and this
>> timer draws 35 nA.
> 
> That does sound surprisingly bad for the Pico.  Seems that the RP2040 is
> 0.18mA in 'dormant' (ie deep sleep) and 0.38mA in 'sleep', which is a bit
> better.  So must be something else on the Pico that's not so good in sleep
> mode.
> 
The broadcomm wifi chip.

> If you've got other stuff hung off the MCU that isn't super low power,
> you're going to have to power-gate it anyway, in which case the nano timer
> will do that at the same time.
> 
Indeed. I have an ultrasonic unit.

I looked at every combination I could think of, and ended up with the 
nano timer after trying to construct my own in analogue.

I can say that the three lithium primary cells plus the nano timer (MUST 
have a BIG electrolytic on its back end or it goes unstable) is THE very 
best way to have a periodic remote sensor 'phone home' if a cable can't 
be laid



-- 
I would rather have questions that cannot be answered...
...than to have answers that cannot be questioned

Richard Feynman

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38076

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
>> 
>> > On 15/06/2026 19:49, Brian Gregory wrote:
>> >> nano timer ??
>> >> What's that then?
>> >
>> > TPL5100
>> >
>> > https://www.ti.com/product/TPL5110
>> 
>> I kinda thought modern microcontrollers have this sort of thing built
>> in? Oh, looks like the Pico (no W) draws 2 mA in "deep sleep" and this
>> timer draws 35 nA. 
>
>That does sound surprisingly bad for the Pico.  Seems that the RP2040 is
>0.18mA in 'dormant' (ie deep sleep) and 0.38mA in 'sleep', which is a bit
>better.  So must be something else on the Pico that's not so good in sleep
>mode.
I think (ultra) low power was not a primary design goal for the Pico. 

-- 
Dipl.-Inform(FH) Peter Heitzer, peter.heitzer@rz.uni-regensburg.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38077

On 24/06/2026 15:51, Peter Heitzer wrote:
> Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 15/06/2026 19:49, Brian Gregory wrote:
>>>>> nano timer ??
>>>>> What's that then?
>>>>
>>>> TPL5100
>>>>
>>>> https://www.ti.com/product/TPL5110
>>>
>>> I kinda thought modern microcontrollers have this sort of thing built
>>> in? Oh, looks like the Pico (no W) draws 2 mA in "deep sleep" and this
>>> timer draws 35 nA.
>>
>> That does sound surprisingly bad for the Pico.  Seems that the RP2040 is
>> 0.18mA in 'dormant' (ie deep sleep) and 0.38mA in 'sleep', which is a bit
>> better.  So must be something else on the Pico that's not so good in sleep
>> mode.
> I think (ultra) low power was not a primary design goal for the Pico.
> 

I think that is very true. What attracted me was the amount of flash, 
and ram, the availability of wireless and ADCs and the price. Less than 
a pint of beer in a nightclub.
Arduinos were 3 times the price

The ZeroW running debian is a damn sight easier to code for, however.

-- 
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the 
other is to refuse to believe what is true.”

—Soren Kierkegaard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.raspberry-pi

csiph-web