arm-netbook

arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk

1082 discussions

mark an email no response from lkcl expected
by ronwirring＠Safe-mail.net 20 May '17

20 May '17

My questions are not important. It is interesting to get to know about the hardware discussed here. I do not know if lkcl has a policy of answering all emails. Can I mark an email 'no response from lkcl expected' such he knows not answering is an option if he has better things to do? Thank you lkcl for your work. It has to be difficult.

3 2

does arm-netbook get a forum?
by ronwirring＠Safe-mail.net 20 May '17

20 May '17

Will a forum get created for the pc card instead of this email list?

2 1

Re: [Arm-netbook] rk3399 what full schematics does lkcl want?
by ronwirring＠Safe-mail.net 20 May '17

20 May '17

-------- Original Message -------- From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> Apparently from: arm-netbook-bounces(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk To: Eco-Conscious Computing <arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] rk3399 what full schematics does lkcl want? Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 18:17:16 +0100 > --- > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 4:49 PM, <ronwirring(a)safe-mail.net> wrote: > > > I do not know about this. I understood it all wrong. I thought it was a matter of tfirefly withholding part of the full schematics. > > the t-firefly 3399 is designed, manufactured and sold by a third > party compapy (t-firefly) that has *nothing* to do with rockchip, the > manufacturer of the RK339 processor. > > > Is it correct to say, that the pdf schematics provide the required pieces of information for an eoma rk3399 pc card? > > that is incorrect in about two or three separate and distinct way. > > > Is it correct to say, that pdf full schematics are not easy usable for you in order to make an eoma rk3399 pc card? > > that would be correct in about two or three separate and distinct > ways, the implications of which are that it would cost about $30,000 > and take maybe 6 to 12 *months* to make an eoma rk3399 pc card purely > from a PDF schematic. > > > It is a matter of transforming pdf data into cad data? > > yes, which is a f******g stupid way to do it, as everything has to be > RE-ENTERED - by hand - into the CAD program, to make it "look" like > the PDF output. > > then once that's done you then have to do the PCB design *from* the > schematics, and that takes even longer. and will contain mistakes. > > it's basically a total waste of time and money to eveen consider. Is it difficult or takes a lot of time? I ask because the converting to cad files cannot be split up in numerous pieces and put on a website, where people can each solve one piece? > > > Having rk3399 cad data, you can make an eoma rk3399? > > correct! and it would, in total contrast to trying the incredibly > stupid idea of re-producing that CAD data taking almost a YEAR and > cost tens of thousands of dollars because you made dozens of mistakes, > take about 2-3 weeks instead. > > > Does tfirefly have the firefly rk3399 cad data? > > yes they do otherwise they would not be able to produce the Gerber > files to send off to the PCB manufacturing factory. > > > If so, why won't tfirefly make them public? > > because it's their proprietary and confidential data that's why! > they're a commercial company that wants to make money, having > absolutely nothing to do with rockchip (who are just a supplier of the > RK339 processor). > > why on earth would they destroy their own business by making it > possible for people to take the CAD files, create some gerbers, have > SOMEONE ELSE manufacture THEIR product and thus cut them completely > out of the loop? > > that would be very dumb of them to do, if their business is to make > money from selling t-firefly-rk3399 products, wouldn't it? > > > > Because a license prohibits it? > > no. > > > Because competitors can use them? > > correct. > > > Lkcl, have you asked tfirefly to give you the full schematics cad data? > > no... because they would think i was a bit dumb. or worse, wanted to > steal their business. i have no desire to piss them off. > > > > Because I got to think, you said tfirefly is withholding some schematics, > > no i did not say that. it may be true but i would not have > specifically said it. i may have said that *rockchip* has *not made > available the reference design* which is a totally different matter. > > you may have then thought "rockchip equals firefly". > > please try not to make cross-connections and/or correlations that > aren't actually the case. > > > > I wrote tfirefly asking them to email me the full schematics. Tfirefly never denied, that they had not made the full schematics public. They said, they could not disclose the full schematics. Maybe due to a lack of english skills on both sides. > > no, you've just misunderstood their business model. please don't ask > them again, it's not fair to ask them to make public something which > will destroy their business model. > > > > Then what should you ask tfirefly for? Full schematics cad data? > > absolutely nothing. you don't ask them for anything. they're a > third party business - an OEM. > > and we also can't ask rockchip either, because we're not going to > order a million of their processors, cash up-front... *until* they > have made full CAD data available. > > classic catch 22 situation. > > so instead we wait - as i specifically, specifically said - until > rockchip's Reference Designs leak out onto the public internet and are > available on e.g. taobao or other site, for sale for $25. > > l. > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook(a)files.phcomp.co.uk

2 1

Development boards for GuixSD Developers
by Louis Pearson 20 May '17

20 May '17

I asked over on the Guix development list if anyone would be interested in a dev board to help port GuixSD to the eoma68 board. So far there are two people who are interested. I've added them to http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/ and I'm making sure I haven't jumped the gun or anything. Does this look okay?

2 1

Re: [Arm-netbook] rk3399 what full schematics does lkcl want?
by ronwirring＠Safe-mail.net 20 May '17

20 May '17

-------- Original Message -------- From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> Apparently from: arm-netbook-bounces(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk To: Eco-Conscious Computing <arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] rk3399 what full schematics does lkcl want? Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 23:35:37 +0100 > --- > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 8:51 PM, <ronwirring(a)safe-mail.net> wrote: > > > lkcl says, he cannot make use of the rk3399 cpu > > no, i did not say that. i specifically said that it would be a total > waste of my time to *CONSIDER* using the rk3399 until *full reference > design CAD source files are available* > > > because he does not have the full schematics. > > no, i said full reference design PCB and schematic *CAD* files: > that's completely different, as full schematics are usually provided > in "PDF" format which are completely f*****g useless as you have to > re-enter absolutely everything into the CAD design system and it takes > weeks if not months... *and then you have to do the PCB as well*. > > > What are these schematics? > > you mean full reference design PCB and schematic CAD files. > > examples include: > > * http://beagleboard.org/hardware/design search that page for the > words "allegro" and "orcad" > * https://www.kosagi.com/w/index.php?title=Novena_PVT_Design_Source > search that page for "altium source" > * https://github.com/NextThingCo/CHIP-Hardware and again look for the > ".DSN" (orcad) and ".brd" (allegro) files > * https://github.com/radxa/oshw/tree/master/rock_pro likewise > > and many, many more. Jetson TK1, Sabre Lite, Sabre iMX7 - there are > absolutely loads of examples. > > > > Can you tell in advance what schematics are required? > > you mean full reference design PCB and schematic CAD files. yes you > can tell: the best ones contain both an example PMIC layout as well as > the DDR RAM layout. the *absolute* best ones are a fully-working > board (typically named EVB - evaluation board) but a "beaglebone" or > somesuch will do just as well. > > a full reference design basically allows a transformation into a > fully working Card to take place in as little as three weeks. > > the ones that are a pain are the ones that *only* contain an example > DDR RAM layout to the processor. but this alone saves LITERALLY > months of effort. > > > Can you name them? > > name them... sort-of. > > words to use when doing google searches include "BSP" or "EVB" but if > that doesn't work try "{processor name} space {PCB CAD Design Package > name}" > > > Or do you require all of the full schematics? > > the more that is available the less time and money is wasted. > > > You do not know what schematics you require until you have read the full schematics? > > if you just want to READ the schematics you can do that with the > auto-generated (read-only) PDF that is otherwise f******g useless for > doing actual modifications because it's a read-only output from the > CAD package. > > obviously this will however allow you to assess whether the SOURCE of > the CAD files will be any good, such that you can decide whether > you're wasting your time or not. > > for example, it's no good if you have a tiny board and the PDF shows > that the design has (and requires) 8 DDR RAM ICs. or, if it uses > LPDDR RAM or uses POP (package-on-packagee) RAM, you need to make a > decision about that (see the neo900 nightmare they just had because > they picked a POP RAM) > > but once you have reviewed the *READ-ONLY* PDF, even if you obtain > the schematic SOURCE file, you STILL cannot make a final decision > because you NEED TO SEE THE PCB CAD LAYOUT FILE AS WELL. > > the PCB CAD file contains the footprints of the ICs, it contains > tracks laid out, ground planes all done and completed, and a huge > range of engineering expertise including R.F. and E.M. expertise of > the person who did the layout, all done, all of which you DO NOT HAVE > TO DUPLICATE. > > but sometimes the distance between the SoC and the RAM ICs will be > too great: in a small PCB the ICs would not fit, so you would need to > consider *modifying* one of the most difficult and challenging areas > to get right (the DDR layout). that's just nuts: you'd be wasting > your time, so it would be better to find a completely new layout that > someone else has already done. > > sometimes the PMIC (power management ICs) are in the wrong place for > the target PCB size you want, so you have to work out how to move (or > re-lay-out) those, or replace them entirely. that is a whole can of > worms on its own, so again it would be better to see if you can find a > new layout that's been tested and known to work. > > basically it's a hell of a lot of work even to *evaluate* a Reference Design. > > l. > I do not know about this. I understood it all wrong. I thought it was a matter of tfirefly withholding part of the full schematics. Is it correct to say, that the pdf schematics provide the required pieces of information for an eoma rk3399 pc card? Is it correct to say, that pdf full schematics are not easy usable for you in order to make an eoma rk3399 pc card? It is a matter of transforming pdf data into cad data? Having rk3399 cad data, you can make an eoma rk3399? Does tfirefly have the firefly rk3399 cad data? If so, why won't tfirefly make them public? Because a license prohibits it? Because competitors can use them? Lkcl, have you asked tfirefly to give you the full schematics cad data? Because I got to think, you said tfirefly is withholding some schematics, I wrote tfirefly asking them to email me the full schematics. Tfirefly never denied, that they had not made the full schematics public. They said, they could not disclose the full schematics. Maybe due to a lack of english skills on both sides. Then what should you ask tfirefly for? Full schematics cad data? > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook(a)files.phcomp.co.uk

4 4

3D printing requirements
by Vincent 19 May '17

19 May '17

Hi Luke, I saw your recent update on crowdsupply. Could you please list the specific requirements you need for 3d printing? Otherwise it will be difficult to help you out. Ideally, you can provide us with the following data: - maximum print dimension in width X length (e.g., 200x200mm) - minimum wall thickness (e.g., 1mm) - smallest detail (e.g., 0.3mm) Also, having a single component of the casework as a sample print could be helpful (meaning: if this prints OK, we would expect that all the other components are of equal quality). I value your quality-first approach and do not want to settle for less. We have a couple of decent 3dprinting suppliers in Germany which I did use in the past (though, for tiny objects only). I could offer to get quotes from them and/or do some negotiating. Also, check their quality based on the sample component to print (which I could also send to you). Another approach could be to distribute the load: There are many hacker/maker spaces around the world. Many of them do have 3d printers and offer printing at much cheaper rates. I do have good friends at a maker space with an Ultimaker 2+ and most of the time the printer is idle. Since they are a registered voluntary association, they are always interested in receiving minor donations in return for services. I could ask them to print a couple of cases? Another idea: How about buying 10 Ultimaker+ and selling them via crowdsupply as part of the EOMA68 campaign (with a reasonable deduction, due to the reason being used)? You did address PLA a couple of times. How about the resin option? Any specifics? How many people ordered it? Cheers, Vincent

4 3

beowulf clustering EOMA68
by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 19 May '17

19 May '17

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Neil Jansen <njansen1(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> wrote: > >> size, power budget. in about 5-8 years it won't be an issue. >> EOMA200 is better suited to clustering. bigger PCB size and a much >> higher power budget. > > I'm not really concerned about size. What do you mean by power budget? 5W per card in the current standard, with an "option" to increase that to 10W *if the housing supports it*. that means having sufficient thermal cooling/ > What's to stop me or anyone else from buying, say, 8x EOMA68's and > networking them? nothing. > (gigabit or otherwise)? no ethernet. USB3 *if the Card supports it*... which the A20 doesn't. > Assuming that a backplane is the > only thing in the way, that could happen pretty easily. The only other > thing missing at that point would be availability of the 1st gen cards, but > that should get better in time, I'd think. Cost wise it's still less than > an Intel NUC, if you're not counting the cost of the backplane. you can't get a 1000 pin 15W *processor* nor can you get 128-bit-wide DDR3 memory bus bandwidth into an EOMA68 case. ok the latter you might be able to do if you used 4x 32-bit-wide LPDDR3 RAM ICs but the entire 5W power budget would be blown on running the RAM even at only around 1066mhz.

1 0

rk3399 what full schematics does lkcl want?
by ronwirring＠Safe-mail.net 18 May '17

18 May '17

lkcl says, he cannot make use of the rk3399 cpu because he does not have the full schematics. What are these schematics? Can you tell in advance what schematics are required? Can you name them? Or do you require all of the full schematics? You do not know what schematics you require until you have read the full schematics?

2 1

Re: [Arm-netbook] Sourcing PCMCIA type 2 and type 3 cases
by ronwirring＠Safe-mail.net 17 May '17

17 May '17

3 2

Re: [Arm-netbook] Totally derailed topic
by doark＠mail.com 17 May '17

17 May '17

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 I apologize for DOS'ing the list, I can only get online about once a week. On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 14:27:00 +0000 Lyberta <lyberta(a)lyberta.net> wrote: > > Christopher Havel: > > @ Lyberta -- I'll just say that I don't think it's any healthier to be > > wanting to kill other people than it is to be wanting to kill > > yourself. Somehow that doesn't fit my definition of 'normal'. But > > that's me -- and I don't want to, you know, tell you how to think. > > Not my job. So I'll drop this for now, except to say that pills can > > do you a world of good if you let them. > > This is a humane execution. They turn you into a vegetable and other > people think you are awake, but you are asleep, you have no coherent > thoughts. I have gained 40 kgs under antipsychotics and now I have > problems standing up and sitting down, I have low blood pressure, my > knees hurt a lot, I can barely walk anymore. I'm just a lump of fat now. > Lump of fat that waits for the world to kill it. @ Lyberta, I've been thinking a lot about what you wrote, what I'm about to write could be totally wrong, but if I'm right it would lead to a cure for you. I'm not a psychiatrist, but I do know what a request for help from anyone, anyone at all, looks like. I suspect that you might be more intelligent than people give you credit for. I suspect that you're caught in the ultimate trap, weather you realize it consciously it or not. You see, when philosophers first removed God from their philosophies they are tasked then with trying to find a purpose to life. As others on this list pointed out becoming a homicidal maniac is pointless, but as the aforementioned philosophers found, the universe will eventually end and all that is, or was, or could be, or could have been will cease to exist. They were thus confounded in the question that never has been answered by atheists. That would be, "When should I die." and more generally, "What is the point of it all." I've seen many people caught in this trap, perhaps without knowing it. They start off as fun people capable of much, as they age they realize what they have not done, and what they are not and probably will never be. They then try things like suicide, or boasting, and thus they loose those qualities which draw others to them if not their life as well. I think you're caught in the same trap, unable to realize your own potential for lack of a moral standard (it also suffers as a result of an Atheistic philosophy), and unable to accept a pointless existence. You see, Killing others would be something (you describe laughing at them and being rid of them), and killing yourself would cause you to no longer think about your problems. So my theory would at least satisfy both of your, ahem, ravings, in as much as it would point to a root cause of both. I said above that "I suspect that you might be more intelligent than people give you credit for," and here is what I mean. If you can reason that far, even subconsciously, then you have gotten farther then most in as much as you realize the lack of adequate solutions. Put another way, you are way up there with the very best Atheistic minds. Now I could easily go on, but I think that I'll leave you with a hopefully clearer understanding of what is bothering you. As Mr. Havel pointed out, I don't intend to tell you how to think, and ultimately, more people are cured everyday of mentally related problems by their own minds then drugs, or what others tell them. Think about it, panic, too much and a person can't function, too little and they are lackadaisical. Or fear, or pain, or love (I'm talking emotional attraction), or well, anything. In any and all cases I think you might enjoy a book that is eyeopening, insightful and uplifting, with respect to the world around you, as opposed to your more dreary, despairing, world view. This would at least give you lots of interesting and worthwhile things to think about IMHO and it would be something that even a vegetable could do :) I'd suggest "The Chronicles of Narnia" by C.S. Lewis and "The phantom Toll Both" by Norton Juster. It is from "The Chronicles of Narnia" that we get the quote "Oh my mistress do not by any means destroy yourself, for if you live you may yet have good fortune, but all the dead are dead alike!" The very best, David -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEL2N7+xWmVOJDQxWGm3XCrhg2YP8FAlkPgs4ACgkQm3XCrhg2 YP9kaxAA58VjxuBdopWgK2Po9nyUfXZmCtv3bq8fL7JoGD8/bQ0aLk9JpvtNm6J4 ZOIjtJzcz8Kdfap3v3ry6CwqXqY7yYnzFkLuCqVLxER7+WXe1F7fOlgupq+GGZAb nwgqoObJJbQR/TD3SKgUHJ3/tPykb2jWN9Kqorgr97DserqRG8hIOgqFN4pKo+8o bDxqKUpGzRIcSX6k3edt6G0I0aJTPwQVW6kegN3BEvOj3PlGByrg2mhWUPZXF4Da A9aQKAUfEJyyqjboeILi1MlIg9CJJjEpImCqvre19Y6b0s203D+epVn3sqCZcYTo MS/uYRk87GKU0zq15WO1lmNtprptXmDGob3YrI8CjocEUpgxqeZ9hwXniDnXHt2C zo6odx40sn283k/8lPA+Tfsc8CdhAs5b4QkNQtkRnZjFxJPaUe4diBhfWPyJHA4+ GhxFeC9Lpgh7ftAMAJfRRDuOqQ7juUHSmbJmulvUwf55sAzA4miP9qdrvR9zDIIz 8goJDinuU1IwTlDCjiGUDE3RMdHeNxwLoI2wtqsOErSJJunkd6zxUq/gy+1wZljd uvMAZpqy5ni6gc8+Ck5D7DFSl4WFfR/LbwTjoTY7Mii+2ipkbU+dQgm0IiFPmJIZ Beink0Hv7kBga1aAz5xe7/IdeG0kH0GXUn+/W2uEV27EuG4sWQ8= =BlCA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

14 42

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

arm-netbook