Retirement of fsl-imx51 in Karmic
 

Just out of curiosity, why not use the same kernel as in Lucid? They
are the same base kernel, just built for different HW (armv6+vfp vs
armv7).

And the issue with the boards at the sprint was on bbg 2.5 boards from
what I understood.

--
Tobin Davis

If the future isn't what it used to be, does that mean that the past
is subject to change in times to come?


On Mon, 2010-09-20 at 19:02 +0200, Stefan Bader wrote:
> I hope I got the relevant people included... I am writing this in preparation to
> remove the fsl-imx51 topic branch from the actively supported topic branches in
> Karmic.
>
> Why? This branch has seriously fallen into unmaintained already. When asking
> around we usually have no hardware to test and I am being told that there are no
> projects which use this.
> Additionally we had this bricking issue with 3.0 babbage boards (or was that
> 2.5?) which only was fixed in Lucid code. So we either need to replace the
> Karmic code with the Lucid patches or should drop it. And I don't see much use
> in doing that work if nobody really cares.
>
> So if anybody *does* care, speak now.
>
> -Stefan


--
Ubuntu-mobile mailing list
Ubuntu-mobile@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-mobile

Retirement of fsl-imx51 in Karmic
 

Just out of curiosity, why not use the same kernel as in Lucid? They
are the same base kernel, just built for different HW (armv6+vfp vs
armv7).

And the issue with the boards at the sprint was on bbg 2.5 boards from
what I understood.

--
Tobin Davis

If the future isn't what it used to be, does that mean that the past
is subject to change in times to come?


On Mon, 2010-09-20 at 19:02 +0200, Stefan Bader wrote:
> I hope I got the relevant people included... I am writing this in preparation to
> remove the fsl-imx51 topic branch from the actively supported topic branches in
> Karmic.
>
> Why? This branch has seriously fallen into unmaintained already. When asking
> around we usually have no hardware to test and I am being told that there are no
> projects which use this.
> Additionally we had this bricking issue with 3.0 babbage boards (or was that
> 2.5?) which only was fixed in Lucid code. So we either need to replace the
> Karmic code with the Lucid patches or should drop it. And I don't see much use
> in doing that work if nobody really cares.
>
> So if anybody *does* care, speak now.
>
> -Stefan


--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team

Retirement of fsl-imx51 in Karmic
 

On 09/21/2010 01:02 AM, Stefan Bader wrote:
> I hope I got the relevant people included... I am writing this in preparation to
> remove the fsl-imx51 topic branch from the actively supported topic branches in
> Karmic.
>
> Why? This branch has seriously fallen into unmaintained already. When asking
> around we usually have no hardware to test and I am being told that there are no
> projects which use this.
> Additionally we had this bricking issue with 3.0 babbage boards (or was that
> 2.5?) which only was fixed in Lucid code. So we either need to replace the
> Karmic code with the Lucid patches or should drop it. And I don't see much use
> in doing that work if nobody really cares.
>
> So if anybody *does* care, speak now.
>
> -Stefan
>

works for me

--
Tim Gardner tim.gardner@canonical.com

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team

Retirement of fsl-imx51 in Karmic
 

On 09/21/2010 01:02 AM, Stefan Bader wrote:
> I hope I got the relevant people included... I am writing this in preparation to
> remove the fsl-imx51 topic branch from the actively supported topic branches in
> Karmic.
>
> Why? This branch has seriously fallen into unmaintained already. When asking
> around we usually have no hardware to test and I am being told that there are no
> projects which use this.
> Additionally we had this bricking issue with 3.0 babbage boards (or was that
> 2.5?) which only was fixed in Lucid code. So we either need to replace the
> Karmic code with the Lucid patches or should drop it. And I don't see much use
> in doing that work if nobody really cares.
>
> So if anybody *does* care, speak now.
>
> -Stefan
>

works for me

--
Tim Gardner tim.gardner@canonical.com

--
Ubuntu-mobile mailing list
Ubuntu-mobile@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-mobile

Retirement of fsl-imx51 in Karmic
 

On 09/20/2010 07:39 PM, Tobin Davis wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, why not use the same kernel as in Lucid? They
> are the same base kernel, just built for different HW (armv6+vfp vs
> armv7).

We could and that would be done by moving the code back from the Lucid repo to
the Karmic repo (in order to make kernels for a release be in the release repo).
But frankly, even this being not a big issue to do, I do not really want to
spend any effort on something that is not used. And if every development and
project has moved to Lucid, why bother?

Ike, are you aware of any Karmic arm project for OEM that use the fsl-imx51
branch there?

-Stefan

>
> And the issue with the boards at the sprint was on bbg 2.5 boards from
> what I understood.
>


--
Ubuntu-mobile mailing list
Ubuntu-mobile@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-mobile

Retirement of fsl-imx51 in Karmic
 

On 09/20/2010 07:39 PM, Tobin Davis wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, why not use the same kernel as in Lucid? They
> are the same base kernel, just built for different HW (armv6+vfp vs
> armv7).

We could and that would be done by moving the code back from the Lucid repo to
the Karmic repo (in order to make kernels for a release be in the release repo).
But frankly, even this being not a big issue to do, I do not really want to
spend any effort on something that is not used. And if every development and
project has moved to Lucid, why bother?

Ike, are you aware of any Karmic arm project for OEM that use the fsl-imx51
branch there?

-Stefan

>
> And the issue with the boards at the sprint was on bbg 2.5 boards from
> what I understood.
>


--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team

Retirement of fsl-imx51 in Karmic
 

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Stefan Bader
<stefan.bader@canonical.com> wrote:
> On 09/20/2010 07:39 PM, Tobin Davis wrote:
>> Just out of curiosity, why not use the same kernel as in Lucid? *They
>> are the same base kernel, just built for different HW (armv6+vfp vs
>> armv7).
>
> We could and that would be done by moving the code back from the Lucid repo to
> the Karmic repo (in order to make kernels for a release be in the release repo).
> But frankly, even this being not a big issue to do, I do not really want to
> spend any effort on something that is not used. And if every development and
> project has moved to Lucid, why bother?
>
> Ike, are you aware of any Karmic arm project for OEM that use the fsl-imx51
> branch there?
>

I agree to drop this support in karmic for fsl-imx51. No OEM project
is based on Karmic fsl-imx51.

Thanks,
-Bryan

--
Ubuntu-mobile mailing list
Ubuntu-mobile@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-mobile

Retirement of fsl-imx51 in Karmic
 

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Stefan Bader
<stefan.bader@canonical.com> wrote:
> On 09/20/2010 07:39 PM, Tobin Davis wrote:
>> Just out of curiosity, why not use the same kernel as in Lucid? *They
>> are the same base kernel, just built for different HW (armv6+vfp vs
>> armv7).
>
> We could and that would be done by moving the code back from the Lucid repo to
> the Karmic repo (in order to make kernels for a release be in the release repo).
> But frankly, even this being not a big issue to do, I do not really want to
> spend any effort on something that is not used. And if every development and
> project has moved to Lucid, why bother?
>
> Ike, are you aware of any Karmic arm project for OEM that use the fsl-imx51
> branch there?
>

I agree to drop this support in karmic for fsl-imx51. No OEM project
is based on Karmic fsl-imx51.

Thanks,
-Bryan

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team

Retirement of fsl-imx51 in Karmic
 

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Bryan Wu <bryan.wu@canonical.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Stefan Bader
> <stefan.bader@canonical.com> wrote:
>> On 09/20/2010 07:39 PM, Tobin Davis wrote:
>>> Just out of curiosity, why not use the same kernel as in Lucid? *They
>>> are the same base kernel, just built for different HW (armv6+vfp vs
>>> armv7).
>>
>> We could and that would be done by moving the code back from the Lucid repo to
>> the Karmic repo (in order to make kernels for a release be in the release repo).
>> But frankly, even this being not a big issue to do, I do not really want to
>> spend any effort on something that is not used. And if every development and
>> project has moved to Lucid, why bother?
>>
>> Ike, are you aware of any Karmic arm project for OEM that use the fsl-imx51
>> branch there?
>>
>
> I agree to drop this support in karmic for fsl-imx51. No OEM project
> is based on Karmic fsl-imx51.
>

There is no known OEM project based on Karmic mvl-dove as well.

And if Lucid kernel can support Karmic user-space out of the box, I
would vote for drop mvl-dove in karmic kernel as well.

And Cc'ed David to see the impact from biz perspective?

> Thanks,
> -Bryan
>

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team

Retirement of fsl-imx51 in Karmic
 

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Bryan Wu <bryan.wu@canonical.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Stefan Bader
> <stefan.bader@canonical.com> wrote:
>> On 09/20/2010 07:39 PM, Tobin Davis wrote:
>>> Just out of curiosity, why not use the same kernel as in Lucid? *They
>>> are the same base kernel, just built for different HW (armv6+vfp vs
>>> armv7).
>>
>> We could and that would be done by moving the code back from the Lucid repo to
>> the Karmic repo (in order to make kernels for a release be in the release repo).
>> But frankly, even this being not a big issue to do, I do not really want to
>> spend any effort on something that is not used. And if every development and
>> project has moved to Lucid, why bother?
>>
>> Ike, are you aware of any Karmic arm project for OEM that use the fsl-imx51
>> branch there?
>>
>
> I agree to drop this support in karmic for fsl-imx51. No OEM project
> is based on Karmic fsl-imx51.
>

There is no known OEM project based on Karmic mvl-dove as well.

And if Lucid kernel can support Karmic user-space out of the box, I
would vote for drop mvl-dove in karmic kernel as well.

And Cc'ed David to see the impact from biz perspective?

> Thanks,
> -Bryan
>

--
Ubuntu-mobile mailing list
Ubuntu-mobile@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-mobile