From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Sat Feb 1 17:12:21 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D4461FCD29; Sat, 1 Feb 2020 17:12:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [18.222.6.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.soaustin.net", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4890yD047Bz3Hy6; Sat, 1 Feb 2020 17:12:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from lonesome.com (unknown [18.188.142.31]) by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1850513E43; Sat, 1 Feb 2020 17:12:19 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2020 17:12:18 +0000 From: Mark Linimon To: Ihor Antonov Cc: Justin Hibbits , freebsd-arm , Paul Mather , Poul-Henning Kamp , freebsd-arch , Emmanuel Vadot , Robert Clausecker Subject: Re: arm64 as Tier 1 for FreeBSD 13 Message-ID: <20200201171215.GB24259@lonesome.com> References: <17938.1575444597@critter.freebsd.dk> <20191204092402.GA82492@fuz.su> <78425.1580332298@critter.freebsd.dk> <20200129222907.3ccaf4c23fe8509e3f9cdfe4@bidouilliste.net> <84926.1580333803@critter.freebsd.dk> <20200130112932.46ccb9fe@titan.knownspace> <20200131203708.e5q3rij53jzr4req@sea-ll-10936> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200131203708.e5q3rij53jzr4req@sea-ll-10936> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4890yD047Bz3Hy6 X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of linimon@lonesome.com has no SPF policy when checking 18.222.6.11) smtp.mailfrom=linimon@lonesome.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.00 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.93)[-0.933,0]; IP_SCORE(-0.19)[ip: (0.05), ipnet: 18.220.0.0/14(0.19), asn: 16509(-1.12), country: US(-0.05)]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[lonesome.com]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.58)[-0.577,0]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED(-0.20)[11.6.222.18.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.2]; RCPT_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[8]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16509, ipnet:18.220.0.0/14, country:US]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[gmail.com]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 02 Feb 2020 10:33:34 +0000 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2020 17:12:21 -0000 On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 12:37:08PM -0800, Ihor Antonov wrote: > A good alternative to RPi are Pine64 devices. Same price level, open > hardware, specs (apart from broadcom wifi), and the company is very > interested in growing BSD support IIUC we're doing well on Pine64. I _personally_ think the machine is more interesting, which is why I have one of them. That said, Raspberry Pi won the "mindshare war" years ago. mcl