Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 21:33:22 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Andrew Reilly <areilly@bigpond.net.au> Cc: arm@freebsd.org, Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com>, George Neville-Neil <gnn@neville-neil.com> Subject: Re: Towards an ARM system-building script Message-ID: <1A445C08-A529-4060-82D8-2BFA4BAD1DF3@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20120929033002.GA18294@johnny.reilly.home> References: <DD05E72B9F474BFE96B6A4B050D2A18A@gmail.com> <0DCAC001-FF06-431A-A486-2B50BE913B0D@bsdimp.com> <FAA208C1-2872-4BB6-A7EC-04C757533CA4@kientzle.com> <7E18623F-3945-4EA0-B332-5A5C717B20F0@kientzle.com> <9896AA3E-D8A0-4CE8-8160-4672AA07388F@cheney.net> <6B74ADD7-3266-4919-BEB4-B10E0C1BAB58@kientzle.com> <5679C679-A434-4714-BE61-4DC093DA7F34@kientzle.com> <034F9446-B2FB-44AD-BDEE-4C2FBAC51796@neville-neil.com> <9E070889-190A-42B1-9B46-94B1AEF2C20E@kientzle.com> <B0F429ED-F129-4BF4-9C5D-C32FC589F4A0@bsdimp.com> <20120929033002.GA18294@johnny.reilly.home>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sep 28, 2012, at 9:30 PM, Andrew Reilly wrote: > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 09:54:59AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: >>=20 >> On Sep 25, 2012, at 9:40 AM, Tim Kientzle wrote: >>> On Sep 25, 2012, at 7:18 AM, George Neville-Neil wrote: >>>> Great that you're moving this forwards! I wonder how we can get = this into >>>> the main tree so that it gets the appropriate help and testing. = Any ideas >>>> on where you'd want to put this Tim? >>>=20 >>> Once it can handle a couple of boards and I'm convinced >>> it's actually legible and useful to someone other than me, >>> then it could go beside nanobsd. Someday, someday, I'd >>> like to see this used to build "official FreeBSD releases" >>> for some of these boards, but we've all got a bit of work >>> ahead of us before we're ready for that. >>=20 >> Yea. I'd normally lobby for hacks to NanoBSD to make this happen, = but I've come to the conclusion that I don't have the bandwidth to still = be the nanobsd maintainer. >>=20 >>> Needs a better name than beaglebsd, though; it aspires >>> to so much more. ;-) >>=20 >> armv6bsd isn't catchy either. BaSeDarm isn't much better :) >=20 > As an interested bystander looking for an opportunity to get > involved, I'm curious: why the emphasis on "armv6" that I've > seen, regarding these boards that all use processors that are > ARMv7 architecture devices? Sure, armv6 is very similar, but > armv7 is what ARM calls them. armv6 means all armv6 or armv7 processors. Warner=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1A445C08-A529-4060-82D8-2BFA4BAD1DF3>