Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:34:39 +0100 From: Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely7.cicely.de> To: Kris <krisb@interia.eu> Cc: Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com>, freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD on the $9 C.H.I.P Message-ID: <20160215123438.GK75922@cicely7.cicely.de> In-Reply-To: <56BCD629.3040209@interia.eu> References: <56BBD0B0.7040407@thieprojects.ch> <56BBD6B9.3090703@interia.eu> <20160211104534.5c18d1d32b3b55fdc458f6a5@bidouilliste.com> <56BCD629.3040209@interia.eu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 07:42:49PM +0100, Kris wrote: > Yep, that's what I meant. As long as we distinguish Allwinner naming > convention from what is inside we shall be fine (although Allwinner > tries hard to confuse people... as if ARM had not done enough :) ) > That being said I think support for Allwinner chips is worth being > continued. They are cheap, quite robust, quite popular, and > documentation is reasonably available (credits go to sunxi I must admit) This is the first time I hear someone saying that documentation for Allwinner is available. Any links to share or is this still under some kind of NDA? -- B.Walter <bernd@bwct.de> http://www.bwct.de Modbus/TCP Ethernet I/O Baugruppen, ARM basierte FreeBSD Rechner uvm.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160215123438.GK75922>