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

Groups > linux.debian.user > #242796 > unrolled thread

Firefox ESR EOL

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 11:20 +0100
    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Georgi Naplatanov <gosho@oles.biz> - 2021-12-09 14:00 +0100
      Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 15:20 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-12-09 17:40 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Kenneth Parker <sea7kenp@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 17:50 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-12-09 17:50 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Georgi Naplatanov <gosho@oles.biz> - 2021-12-09 18:00 +0100
              Re: Firefox ESR EOL Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-12-09 18:30 +0100
                Re: Firefox ESR EOL Georgi Naplatanov <gosho@oles.biz> - 2021-12-09 18:50 +0100
                  Re: Firefox ESR EOL Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-12-09 19:30 +0100
                    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Georgi Naplatanov <gosho@oles.biz> - 2021-12-09 20:00 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-12-09 18:30 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 18:30 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 18:30 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2021-12-09 21:50 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Jonathan Dowland <jon+debian-user@dow.land> - 2021-12-09 23:10 +0100
              Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 23:20 +0100
                Re: Firefox ESR EOL "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2021-12-09 23:30 +0100
                  Re: Firefox ESR EOL Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-12-09 23:40 +0100
                Re: Firefox ESR EOL Michael Castellon <castellonmichael@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 00:00 +0100
                  Re: Firefox ESR EOL Jonathan Dowland <jon+debian-user@dow.land> - 2021-12-10 11:50 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Marco Möller <talby@debianlists.mobilxpress.net> - 2021-12-09 23:30 +0100
              Re: Firefox ESR EOL Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 11:00 +0100
                Re: Firefox ESR EOL Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-12-18 21:50 +0100
                  Re: Firefox ESR EOL Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2021-12-18 23:30 +0100
                    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-12-19 00:10 +0100
                    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Rainer Dorsch <ml@bokomoko.de> - 2021-12-19 10:30 +0100
                    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2021-12-20 11:00 +0100
                      Re: Firefox ESR EOL Jeremy Ardley <jeremy@ardley.org> - 2021-12-20 11:10 +0100
                        Re: Firefox ESR EOL gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-12-20 12:50 +0100
                          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-12-20 15:50 +0100
                            Re: Firefox ESR EOL John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> - 2021-12-20 17:10 +0100
                            Re: Firefox ESR EOL gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-12-21 00:00 +0100
                          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-25 12:10 +0100
                            Re: Firefox ESR EOL gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-12-25 18:40 +0100
                        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-12-20 16:40 +0100
                  Re: Firefox ESR EOL David Newman <dnewman@networktest.com> - 2021-12-18 23:30 +0100
                    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-19 09:20 +0100
                      Re: Risc-V [OT: Firefox ESR EOL] Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside <debian@polynamaude.com> - 2021-12-19 19:50 +0100
                        Re: Risc-V [OT: Firefox ESR EOL] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-12-20 10:00 +0100
                          Re: Risc-V [OT: Firefox ESR EOL] Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-25 12:10 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 00:10 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 00:10 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Eric S Fraga <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk> - 2021-12-10 10:30 +0100
              Re: Firefox ESR EOL Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> - 2021-12-10 11:30 +0100
                Re: Firefox ESR EOL Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-12-10 13:30 +0100
                  Re: Firefox ESR EOL Rainer Dorsch <ml@bokomoko.de> - 2021-12-18 12:40 +0100
                    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Georgi Naplatanov <gosho@oles.biz> - 2021-12-18 20:10 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2021-12-10 11:50 +0100
    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> - 2021-12-09 14:10 +0100
      Re: Firefox ESR EOL Kenneth Parker <sea7kenp@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 17:20 +0100
      Re: Firefox ESR EOL Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 19:30 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-12-09 19:50 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2021-12-09 20:00 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> - 2021-12-10 08:00 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> - 2021-12-10 07:50 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 11:30 +0100
    Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 18:30 +0100
      Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 18:50 +0100
      Re: Firefox ESR EOL Michael Castellon <castellonmichael@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 22:30 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-12-09 22:50 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2021-12-10 01:50 +0100
    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Michael Castellon <castellonmichael@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 18:30 +0100
    [SOLVED] Firefox + Thunderbird upstream solution piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-10 15:10 +0100
      Re: [SOLVED] Firefox + Thunderbird upstream solution Michael Castellon <castellonmichael@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 15:50 +0100
      Re: [SOLVED] Firefox + Thunderbird upstream solution Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-12-10 16:40 +0100
        Re: [SOLVED] Firefox + Thunderbird upstream solution piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-10 17:00 +0100
          Re: [SOLVED] Firefox + Thunderbird upstream solution Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-12-10 17:00 +0100
    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Kushal Kumaran <kushal@locationd.net> - 2021-12-21 02:20 +0100
      Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-26 23:20 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-12-27 09:20 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2021-12-27 09:40 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-12-27 15:30 +0100

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#242888

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 05:51:49PM -0500, Michael Castellon wrote:
>easier than this?

You're comparing apples and oranges, here, because your solution (which
is perfectly fine, by the way, for those who are happy with it: I do
something very similar for myself)  doesn't compile Firefox from source
and is specific to amd64, Debian needs to do something that works for
all 9 architectures we support.  We also apply 22 patches (currently) to
the source tree, every patch needs to be individually checked and
possibly removed or rebased for on every version update. And a
substantial chunk of the work is in getting the (new) build dependencies
sorted out.



-- 
Please do not CC me for listmail.

👱🏻	Jonathan Dowland
✎	 jmtd@debian.org
🔗	https://jmtd.net

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

#242849

On 09.12.21 21:44, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 05:11:05PM +0000, piorunz wrote:
>> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Web-Browser-Packages-Debian
>>
>> :(
>>
>> -- 
>> With kindest regards, Piotr.
>>
>> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
>> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
>> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
>> ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀
> 
> Yes: not great but also not informed. We do package the latest versions as
> we can - the latest dependency on Rust is a problem and the point about
> needing to build toolchains is very valid.
> 
> Too many comments there are just Debian-bashing with no real understanding.
> 
> The one thing that would be good would be a backport of the mesa-utils to
> Bullseye as that would also solve problems with Debian and GUI apps under
> WSL2 and Windows :)
> 
> All the very best, as ever,
> 
> Andy Cater
> 


It's a pity that Debian cannot be flexible to offer more secure and 
already available binary versions of software for the assumed many users 
only caring for installing a binary from the official Debian repository 
on some very typical PC hardware, and marking the rest of the job, like 
providing all the toolchain for those who want to compile software 
themselves, or providing binaries for less frequently used hardware, to 
still be on delay.

I mean, GUI web browsers and GUI email clients like Firefox and 
Thunderbird are more likely used on Intel or AMD powered PCs and 
laptops, than on other architectures, right? This is at least my guess. 
In my opinion and in this particular case it would be good to get a vast 
of users as quickly as possible into secure waters instead of putting 
most of them on risk of grounding in order to treat all possible victims 
the same.

I know that a toolchain is needed to get a published source code for 
everyone reproducible compiled into an executable binary, and that this 
is a very important part of the security to not become fooled. But if 
the toolchain is available already for one platform, then the delivery 
of the more secure software should not be delayed for that platform 
because other platforms are still not ready, at least not for user 
clients of so central importance in nowadays desktop and internet usage.

The "Debian-bashing comments with no real understanding" might not 
provide correct insights into the complex machinery which the Debian 
project is, and I also might not have understood and above commented on 
the situation correctly. But these comments for sure point out that all 
the excellent work of all the active maintainers seems to occasionally 
stumble over a too rigid project policy. I know that the huge Debian 
project will (can? should?) not easily change its way of doing things, 
but some more flexibility at least for some few selected desktop apps 
could improve the Debian project and especially its reputation also as a 
desktop operating system.

Well, just my comment on the situation from a desktop user's 
perspective. Please, I do not wish to discuss (this would hijack this 
thread and create a monster thread on the Debian philosophy). I simply 
thought it is the correct moment and place to leave this comment to the 
Debian developers, and I want to support the original concern brought up 
by this thread that apps like Firefox really need faster publishing of 
available updates. I suggest to consider publishing available updates 
for a platform as soon as available and not delaying this by obstacles 
still being an issue on some other platforms - if I understood the cause 
for the delay correctly.

Thanks for developing and maintaining Debian!
Marco

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

#242882

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Jo, 09 dec 21, 23:24:11, Marco Möller wrote:
> 
> It's a pity that Debian cannot be flexible to offer more secure and already
> available binary versions of software for the assumed many users only caring
> for installing a binary from the official Debian repository on some very
> typical PC hardware, and marking the rest of the job, like providing all the
> toolchain for those who want to compile software themselves, or providing
> binaries for less frequently used hardware, to still be on delay.
> 
> I mean, GUI web browsers and GUI email clients like Firefox and Thunderbird
> are more likely used on Intel or AMD powered PCs and laptops, than on other
> architectures, right? This is at least my guess. In my opinion and in this
> particular case it would be good to get a vast of users as quickly as
> possible into secure waters instead of putting most of them on risk of
> grounding in order to treat all possible victims the same.

$ apt list firefox-esr
firefox-esr/oldstable,now 78.15.0esr-1~deb10u1 arm64 [installed]

One of Debian's strengths is treating all release architectures as first 
class citizens. Without that the Project might as well just drop 
"problematic" architectures.

ARM64 is likely to see *more* (not less) use in desktops and laptops, 
and RISC V might also be an option in the future.

The additional competition is healthy also for x86 (even if less so for 
Intel's and AMD's bottom line).

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

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

#243244

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 3:56 AM Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Jo, 09 dec 21, 23:24:11, Marco Möller wrote:
> >
> > It's a pity that Debian cannot be flexible to offer more secure and
> already
> > available binary versions of software for the assumed many users only
> caring
> > for installing a binary from the official Debian repository on some very
> ....

ARM64 is likely to see *more* (not less) use in desktops and laptops,
> and RISC V might also be an option in the future.
>

Maybe I missed something. Why RISC V?

The additional competition is healthy also for x86 (even if less so for
> Intel's and AMD's bottom line).
>
> Kind regards,
> Andrei
> --
> http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
>

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

#243245

Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> writes:

> Maybe I missed something. Why RISC V?

Just having an alternative is attractive to some. Having an open
alternative even more so.

I'd happily run ARM or RISC-V, if those were an alternative for a decent
desktop or laptop computer. Raspberry Pi is scratching and clawing its
way there little by little. As the Pi 4 has exposed a PCIe connection,
it has a viable storage now for a small system. But still slow and weird
form factor. Maybe in Pi 6 or maybe 10? Who knows.

RISC-V is better in the form factor part as there's a standard Mini-ITX
board but the price and performance aren't there yet. Not to mention
software support. I'd want an official Debian release first.

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

#243251

Anssi Saari wrote: 
> Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Maybe I missed something. Why RISC V?
> 
> Just having an alternative is attractive to some. Having an open
> alternative even more so.
> 
> I'd happily run ARM or RISC-V, if those were an alternative for a decent
> desktop or laptop computer. Raspberry Pi is scratching and clawing its
> way there little by little. As the Pi 4 has exposed a PCIe connection,
> it has a viable storage now for a small system. But still slow and weird
> form factor. Maybe in Pi 6 or maybe 10? Who knows.

Maybe. But Linux support for the Apple M1 CPU (an ARM variant)
is coming along nicely, and it could be a first-class
architecture in a year or two. Performance is not lacking,
though price is not wonderful.

-dsr-

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

#243263

Am Samstag, 18. Dezember 2021, 23:24:02 CET schrieb Anssi Saari:
> Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> writes:
> > Maybe I missed something. Why RISC V?
> 
> Just having an alternative is attractive to some. Having an open
> alternative even more so.
> 
> I'd happily run ARM or RISC-V, if those were an alternative for a decent
> desktop or laptop computer. Raspberry Pi is scratching and clawing its
> way there little by little. As the Pi 4 has exposed a PCIe connection,
> it has a viable storage now for a small system. But still slow and weird
> form factor. Maybe in Pi 6 or maybe 10? Who knows.
> 

I want to order and test a Quartz64:

https://wiki.pine64.org/wiki/Quartz64

It comes with a sata and a pci-e port.

Although I think it is best supported under Manjaro

https://wiki.pine64.org/wiki/Quartz64#Manjaro_ARM

there is a Debian installer

https://wiki.pine64.org/wiki/Quartz64

and

Linux 5.15 brings Quartz64 device tree: https://www.pine64.org/2021/12/15/
december-update-a-year-in-review/ (you need to scroll a bit).


Rough comparison with the Raspberry Pi 4:

https://sbcfinder.com/compare.php?
sbconename=Quartz64%20B&sbconetwoname=Raspberry%20Pi%204

Thanks
Rainer

-- 
Rainer Dorsch
http://bokomoko.de/

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

#243286

On 2021-12-18, Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> wrote:
> Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Maybe I missed something. Why RISC V?
>
> Just having an alternative is attractive to some. Having an open
> alternative even more so.
>
> I'd happily run ARM or RISC-V, if those were an alternative for a decent
> desktop or laptop computer. Raspberry Pi is scratching and clawing its
> way there little by little. As the Pi 4 has exposed a PCIe connection,
> it has a viable storage now for a small system. But still slow and weird
> form factor. Maybe in Pi 6 or maybe 10? Who knows.

The 3.14159265359 is still popular.

> RISC-V is better in the form factor part as there's a standard Mini-ITX
> board but the price and performance aren't there yet. Not to mention
> software support. I'd want an official Debian release first.
>
>
>


-- 

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

#243287

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 20/12/21 5:52 pm, Curt wrote:
> On 2021-12-18, Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> wrote:
>> Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Maybe I missed something. Why RISC V?
>> Just having an alternative is attractive to some. Having an open
>> alternative even more so.
>>
>> I'd happily run ARM or RISC-V, if those were an alternative for a decent
>> desktop or laptop computer. Raspberry Pi is scratching and clawing its
>> way there little by little. As the Pi 4 has exposed a PCIe connection,
>> it has a viable storage now for a small system. But still slow and weird
>> form factor. Maybe in Pi 6 or maybe 10? Who knows.
> The 3.14159265359 is still popular.
>
>> RISC-V is better in the form factor part as there's a standard Mini-ITX
>> board but the price and performance aren't there yet. Not to mention
>> software support. I'd want an official Debian release first.
>>
>>
>>
There are a few ARM SBC that are very powerful - better than Pi 4. They 
have NVME/PCiE disk interfaces and several USB 3.0 interfaces.

The NanoPi M4V2 is one such, but there are several competitors mostly 
using RockChip chipsets.

They run Armbian and usually have integrated gigabit LAN (2.5 Gigabit 
with the right drivers) and dual band wifi and bluetooth.

As a workstation they are more than adequate. As a home server they are 
more than adequate.

-- 
Jeremy

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

#243288

On Monday, December 20, 2021 5:00:07 AM EST Jeremy Ardley wrote:
> On 20/12/21 5:52 pm, Curt wrote:
> > On 2021-12-18, Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> wrote:
> >> Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> writes:
> >>> Maybe I missed something. Why RISC V?
> >> 
> >> Just having an alternative is attractive to some. Having an open
> >> alternative even more so.
> >> 
> >> I'd happily run ARM or RISC-V, if those were an alternative for a decent
> >> desktop or laptop computer. Raspberry Pi is scratching and clawing its
> >> way there little by little. As the Pi 4 has exposed a PCIe connection,
> >> it has a viable storage now for a small system. But still slow and weird
> >> form factor. Maybe in Pi 6 or maybe 10? Who knows.
> > 
> > The 3.14159265359 is still popular.
> > 
> >> RISC-V is better in the form factor part as there's a standard Mini-ITX
> >> board but the price and performance aren't there yet. Not to mention
> >> software support. I'd want an official Debian release first.
> 
> There are a few ARM SBC that are very powerful - better than Pi 4. They
> have NVME/PCiE disk interfaces and several USB 3.0 interfaces.
> 
> The NanoPi M4V2 is one such, but there are several competitors mostly
> using RockChip chipsets.
> 
> They run Armbian and usually have integrated gigabit LAN (2.5 Gigabit
> with the right drivers) and dual band wifi and bluetooth.

Armbian on a rock64, an older version of the rockchip. is in fact much faster 
than a pi4. If the interfaceing for linuxcnc was there it would be more than 
capable of freezing out the pi. Unforch there is zero interest on the part of 
armbian for realtime kernels, so you're on your own building one. That could 
be done, I've done it for the pi3-4's. But this section of the market seems to 
think their future is in multimedia, and has zero interest in machine control. 
For going outside the Foundations fence, I am blacklisted on the raspian pi 
forum.

As a home cnc machine builder, that attitude is killing the market these 
devices could own if they wanted to.  So I have one machine run by a pi, 
drawing perhaps 25 watts with the lcd monitor. The other 4 are running on old 
Dells, drawing 250 watts with monitors. Its the build cost that restricts the 
pi's, over $200 to interface to a machine, The Dells are famously lacking in 
real i/o, but a usable machine can be built for $65 in interfacing.

The first arm board builder to give us two pcie slots or two net ports. or 
even 2 parports WILL OWN this market if the MSRP is under $100 with 2 gigs of 
ram. Ideal would be one pci-e, and one net port. SSD's can be put on the pi4's 
on either or both, usb-3 ports.

> As a workstation they are more than adequate. As a home server they are
> more than adequate.

Absolutely.

Take care and stay well all.

Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

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

#243291

> The first arm board builder to give us two pcie slots or two net
> ports. or  even 2 parports WILL OWN this market if the MSRP is under
> $100 with 2 gigs of  ram.  Ideal would be one pci-e, and one net port.
> SSD's can be put on the pi4's  on either or both, usb-3 ports.

Something like the MochaBin, but a bit cheaper?


        Stefan

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

#243296

Stefan writes:
> Something like the MochaBin, but a bit cheaper?

I have an ESPRESSObin board from that outfit up in the shop somewhere.
It never worked right due to a defect in the voltage regulator chain.
The published schematics for it are wrong, and all my attempts to get
support were ignored.  I'm not sure I want to deal with that outfit
again.
-- 
John Hasler 
john@sugarbit.com
Elmwood, WI USA

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

#243307

On Monday, December 20, 2021 9:45:57 AM EST Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > The first arm board builder to give us two pcie slots or two net
> > ports. or  even 2 parports WILL OWN this market if the MSRP is under
> > $100 with 2 gigs of  ram.  Ideal would be one pci-e, and one net port.
> > SSD's can be put on the pi4's  on either or both, usb-3 ports.
> 
> Something like the MochaBin, but a bit cheaper?
> 
I, once I switched my attention to the pi, haven't paid that much attention. 
Lets just say I got used to the pi's warts. It does have quite a few.
>         Stefan
> 
> .


Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

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

#243435

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Lu, 20 dec 21, 06:42:47, gene heskett wrote:
> 
> The first arm board builder to give us two pcie slots or two net ports. or 
> even 2 parports WILL OWN this market if the MSRP is under $100 with 2 gigs of 
> ram. Ideal would be one pci-e, and one net port. SSD's can be put on the pi4's 
> on either or both, usb-3 ports.

https://pine64.com/product/rockpro64-2gb-single-board-computer/

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

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

#243451

On Saturday, December 25, 2021 6:06:56 AM EST Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Lu, 20 dec 21, 06:42:47, gene heskett wrote:
> > The first arm board builder to give us two pcie slots or two net ports. or
> > even 2 parports WILL OWN this market if the MSRP is under $100 with 2 gigs
> > of ram. Ideal would be one pci-e, and one net port. SSD's can be put on
> > the pi4's on either or both, usb-3 ports.
> 
> https://pine64.com/product/rockpro64-2gb-single-board-computer/
> 
Possibly but out of stock and never will be restocked and they will have a new 
one, probably incompatible, by the time I run my underware thru the washing 
machine. If I'm going to develop an application, I want the stuff to build 
that application available yet 4 or 5 years from now even if I've missed 
morning roll call for good. At 87 yo, I don't even buy green bananas.

Generally, I can do that when I design around a pi. They (rockchip) got me for 
a pair of rock64's around 4 years ago but offered zero support, no emails 
asking boot or realtime linux questions were ever given the courtesy of a 
reply.

> Kind regards,
> Andrei
Take care Andrei, and have a merry Christmas.

Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

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

#243293

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 4:00 AM Jeremy Ardley <jeremy@ardley.org> wrote:

>
> On 20/12/21 5:52 pm, Curt wrote:
> > On 2021-12-18, Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> wrote:
> >> Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> Maybe I missed something. Why RISC V?
> >> Just having an alternative is attractive to some. Having an open
> >> alternative even more so.
> >>
> >> I'd happily run ARM or RISC-V, if those were an alternative for a decent
> >> desktop or laptop computer. Raspberry Pi is scratching and clawing its
> >> way there little by little. As the Pi 4 has exposed a PCIe connection,
> >> it has a viable storage now for a small system. But still slow and weird
> >> form factor. Maybe in Pi 6 or maybe 10? Who knows.
> > The 3.14159265359 is still popular.
> >
> >> RISC-V is better in the form factor part as there's a standard Mini-ITX
> >> board but the price and performance aren't there yet. Not to mention
> >> software support. I'd want an official Debian release first.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> There are a few ARM SBC that are very powerful - better than Pi 4. They
> have NVME/PCiE disk interfaces and several USB 3.0 interfaces.
>

For myself I've always been an Arduino fan over others. And I worked for
British-owned
Premier-Farnell's American property which distributes RPi's here, Newark
Element14 :-)
Helped move their datacenter :-)
Arduino's are mostly ARM-based and models like the Mega are incredibly
powerful and cheap.
Full OS's run on more advanced models, or just Arduino's open-source
runtime. Program in
their C++ environment, python, Java.... Hundreds of snap-on sensor boards
are available.
Italian-made models are on-the-shelf at certain retailers that serve the
maker-community.

I have next to me a prototype synthpad based on an Arduino Uno. 5 years ago
up at Michigan Tech
University, I saw a self-guided submarine drone that had both a Pi and
Arduino on-board. Exploring
in the university's swimming pool.

The NanoPi M4V2 is one such, but there are several competitors mostly
> using RockChip chipsets.
>
> They run Armbian and usually have integrated gigabit LAN (2.5 Gigabit
> with the right drivers) and dual band wifi and bluetooth.
>
> As a workstation they are more than adequate. As a home server they are
> more than adequate.
>
> --
> Jeremy
>
>

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

#243247

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Dec 18, 2021, at 12:44, Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 3:56 AM Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Jo, 09 dec 21, 23:24:11, Marco Möller wrote:
>>> > 
>>> > It's a pity that Debian cannot be flexible to offer more secure and already
>>> > available binary versions of software for the assumed many users only caring
>>> > for installing a binary from the official Debian repository on some very
>>> ....
>> ARM64 is likely to see *more* (not less) use in desktops and laptops, 
>> and RISC V might also be an option in the future.
> 
> 
> Maybe I missed something. Why RISC V?

RISC V is open-source hardware, free of encumbrances from commercial licenses and fees. 

dn


> 
>> The additional competition is healthy also for x86 (even if less so for 
>> Intel's and AMD's bottom line).
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> Andrei
>> -- 
>> http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

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

#243260

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sb, 18 dec 21, 14:22:58, David Newman wrote:
> On Dec 18, 2021, at 12:44, Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 3:56 AM Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Jo, 09 dec 21, 23:24:11, Marco Möller wrote:
> >>> > 
> >>> > It's a pity that Debian cannot be flexible to offer more secure and already
> >>> > available binary versions of software for the assumed many users only caring
> >>> > for installing a binary from the official Debian repository on some very
> >>> ....
> >> ARM64 is likely to see *more* (not less) use in desktops and laptops, 
> >> and RISC V might also be an option in the future.
> > 
> > 
> > Maybe I missed something. Why RISC V?
> 
> RISC V is open-source hardware, free of encumbrances from commercial licenses and fees. 

As well as free from embargoes, so it might be very interesting for chip 
makers in countries affected by such.

It's also quite promising in the performance per watt area and 
performance per square mm, even compared to ARM (which is already better 
than x86 chips).

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

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

#243277 — Re: Risc-V [OT: Firefox ESR EOL]

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2021-12-19 3:13 a.m., Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Sb, 18 dec 21, 14:22:58, David Newman wrote:
>> On Dec 18, 2021, at 12:44, Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 3:56 AM Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jo, 09 dec 21, 23:24:11, Marco Möller wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's a pity that Debian cannot be flexible to offer more secure and already
>>>>>> available binary versions of software for the assumed many users only caring
>>>>>> for installing a binary from the official Debian repository on some very
>>>>> ....
>>>> ARM64 is likely to see *more* (not less) use in desktops and laptops, 
>>>> and RISC V might also be an option in the future.
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe I missed something. Why RISC V?
>>
>> RISC V is open-source hardware, free of encumbrances from commercial licenses and fees. 
Would you have some suggestion if I'd like to try out a Risc-V board ?
Would be interested in building a test system on this architectures.
Do you have some links for buying already built board (and possibly that
would include some type of graphic hardware if it's possible). Something
like a Raspberry Pi but with a Risc-V chipset ?
Thanks
> 
> As well as free from embargoes, so it might be very interesting for chip 
> makers in countries affected by such.
> 
> It's also quite promising in the performance per watt area and 
> performance per square mm, even compared to ARM (which is already better 
> than x86 chips).
> 
> Kind regards,
> Andrei
> 

-- 
Polyna-Maude R.-Summerside
-Be smart, Be wise, Support opensource development

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

#243284 — Re: Risc-V [OT: Firefox ESR EOL]

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 01:44:35PM -0500, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote:

[...]

> Would you have some suggestion if I'd like to try out a Risc-V board ?

Feeding your fave search engine with, e.g. single board computer +"Risc-V"
yields some hits. A couple of examples:

  https://liliputing.com/2021/05/nezha-is-a-99-single-board-pc-with-a-risc-v-processor.html
  https://www.cnx-software.com/2021/04/13/allwinner-d1-linux-risc-v-sbc-processor/
  https://marketresearchtelecast.com/tried-risc-v-single-board-computer-rvboards-nezha-with-debian-linux/98055/
  https://www.reddit.com/r/RISCV/comments/kwgcx2/beaglev_the_first_affordable_riscv_computer/

Don't expect laptop-like or desktop-like performance yet -- rather
embedded-like performance. Those things haven't got the economy of scale
to justify vast caching architectures and other luxuries. That would
make them unaffordable. But things might change...

Cheers
-- 
tomás

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

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web