Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 22 Nov 2013 11:42:56 +0100
From:      "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
To:        "Thomas Mueller" <mueller6724@bellsouth.net>
Cc:        freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: VIA Sprinboard: Alternative to Raspberry Pi - working with FBSD CURRENT?
Message-ID:  <20131122114256.0d5e8e5c@thor.walstatt.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <9A.DA.31125.2592F825@cdptpa-oedge03>
References:  <20131121233408.480ceced@thor.walstatt.dyndns.org> <9A.DA.31125.2592F825@cdptpa-oedge03>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Sig_/pGKqp83+VBxnMB8zEIOgdss
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 09:52:18 +0000
"Thomas Mueller" <mueller6724@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> from O. Hartmann:
>=20
> > Recently,
> > I stumbled into this board, which looks promising:
>=20
> > http://www.viaspringboard.com/products.html
>=20
> > Does anybody know whether the offered hardware (chipse, CPU, WiFi
> > chipset) is supported by FreeBSD?
>=20
> I went to that URL and noticed that the WiFi chip was Atheros AR9271,
> same as one I have and not currently supported by FreeBSD but maybe
> supported in NetBSD-current and Linux.
>=20
> I couldn't tell on my own whether the rest of the system could run
> FreeBSD or NetBSD, but from Ian Lepore's response, it doesn't look
> good.
>=20
> Better off with Raspberry Pi?
>=20
> Tom


Well, as Ian suggested, there is this promising alternative
"Wandboard". The reason is I'm looking for something small and with
performance for routing/gatewaying and playing around with as micro
server. I'm not so convinced by the speed of Raspberry Pi and
especially it's amount of RAM available. Another issue is the 100
MBit/s ethernet NIC, Wandboard seems to come with (regretably only one)
GBit LAN socket.

I haven't finally made up my mind and any decission, Wandboard with
4-core CPU plays in another price region than a simple Raspberry Pi. At
this very moment, I have no comparison to any of them.

Oliver

--Sig_/pGKqp83+VBxnMB8zEIOgdss
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (FreeBSD)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSjzU2AAoJEOgBcD7A/5N8yo4IAJFWPei1CivdWvaUfLjPDsxu
YsdXBWMyGuRzLoFUuirqJIppWSPM6EpEGj5gpVbPoH4v9brm0rKDo9w1BPIFqG3o
Q/Z6V4AUomcG9MtYcd+30YKEb82s74L/Km3jRJRB7GwkjKfVb1fKamr1qcWClWoN
TlkmlSNV9TlpRad87x7o+ojvLicFjt5q0fFHK4MWSWnjgc0Y06hV9U3TlC5lKkSM
LwBTEUQL14d8eJIy22+eGJrlnlHlPLJZ7jKff0HOenRxyWgcmOUQ7T+wa4kShJFn
HyCmSXC7Qf49xZQrc5J9c15sIiJgc2XtVu2zjFBJuDt+s6LSCgDR17LhH10yTmU=
=BVnB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Sig_/pGKqp83+VBxnMB8zEIOgdss--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20131122114256.0d5e8e5c>