Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 12:56:44 -0600 From: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> To: Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CUBOX snapshots working? Message-ID: <1506452204.73082.147.camel@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20170926204622.67ae9edbca62e2dcdbd1ea31@bidouilliste.com> References: <201709260339.VAA16701@mail.lariat.net> <1506435673.73082.129.camel@freebsd.org> <201709261732.LAA21422@mail.lariat.net> <20170926200446.c188fda613df2ffb894b1ff3@bidouilliste.com> <1506450112.73082.143.camel@freebsd.org> <20170926204622.67ae9edbca62e2dcdbd1ea31@bidouilliste.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2017-09-26 at 20:46 +0200, Emmanuel Vadot wrote: > On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 12:21:52 -0600 > Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2017-09-26 at 20:04 +0200, Emmanuel Vadot wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:32:21 -0600 > > > Brett Glass <brett@lariat.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One would think that sauce for the goose would be sauce for the > > > > gander. But is this particular Cubox now useless with FreeBSD? > > > > And if so, why? It is not an unusual model. The Cubox does work > > > > if I flash their "Ignition" startup software (which is used to > > > > bootstrap by downloading various OS images) to the same > > > > Micro SD card. > > > > > > > > --Brett Glass > > > The problem isn't FreeBSD related, it's U-Boot related. > > > > > > You could test build mainline u-boot just to confirm that it > > > isn't > > > something due to our ports. > > > > > If we used to provide working cubox images and we don't anymore, > > it's > > hard to call that anything but a freebsd problem. > There is working cubox images, the last one is from yesterday. > You even say yourself that you did test it and that it worked. > Do we even know if the snapshot worked for this board ? > Brett, could you test the 11.0 release for example ? (I don't > remember > if for 11.1 we already switch u-boot or not). > > > > > You seem to be implying that this is another problem caused by > > switching from vendor-specific to mainline uboot. I'm not sure > > that's > > the case here, but if it is, be clear: It is purely a freebsd > > problem, > > because it was purely our choice (not mine) to switch from > > something > > that worked to something that doesn't. > > > > -- Ian > Yes, maybe switching to mainline for IMX boards was a premature one, > I > honestly don't have IMX board and don't know which way we should > take. > All I can say is that for TI and Allwinner board, mainline U-Boot is > better (at least the support is the same). If you want to switch back > to vendor u-boot for IMX board fell free to do so (as long as you > don't > change the other SoC U-Boot). > No, the mainline uboot for TI is NOT better. It cannot netboot, and that is a regression from the previous version, which worked just fine. -- Ian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 08:21 AM 9/26/2017, Ian Lepore wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just DLed and booted that snapshot on my Cubox-4i without > > > > > any > > > > > problems. As near as I can tell, the only difference is > > > > > you've > > > > > got the > > > > > dual-core chip and mine has the quad. > > > > > > > > > > The same u-boot should work for both. At least, that was the > > > > > case when > > > > > using the vendor-provided u-boot; the images are now built > > > > > from > > > > > mainline u-boot. The output you provided does show that it > > > > > detected > > > > > the right kind of chip and amount of ram, so I think it > > > > > should > > > > > support > > > > > both flavors of cubox. > > > > > > > > > > -- Ian > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > freebsd-arm@freebsd.org mailing list > > > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm > > > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arm-unsubscribe@freeb > > > > sd.o > > > > rg" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1506452204.73082.147.camel>