maemo.org - Talk
Page 41 of 41 « First 313940 41
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

maemo.org - Talk (https://talk.maemo.org/index.php)
-   Community (https://talk.maemo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   [Council] Council_Update-July_2011 (https://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=74790)

momcilo 2011-08-10 14:52
Re: [Council] Council_Update-July_2011
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by timoph (Post 1067304)
I wouldn't hold my breath on Nokia providing open source drivers for old devices. Especially if they've licensed the drivers themselves from another company.
I think it is time to re-discuss that with Nokia. I don't know for sure, but I think Nokia was not that dependant on third parties for drivers within 770/N800/N810.

Quote:
Originally Posted by timoph (Post 1067304)
But what they have done recently is that they relicensed e.g. BME as redistributable binary in non-commercial use to aid the CE effort.
Great thing from the point of legality, but that will not keep boat floating in long term.

jurop88 2011-08-10 15:09
Re: [Council] Council_Update-July_2011
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by momcilo (Post 1067295)
who and when has squashed Nokia?
I am one of them who thinks Microsoft put Elop at the head of Nokia in order to let them abandon the open source path. Nobody of us knows the truth except the actors, but looking at the N9 launch, it looks like all that (Elop->Symbian->Meego affairs) had been done because it was dangerous to leave IBM and Nokia to act together.
And think about North America: Nokia never had a great success in the USA because they never went down to strict agreements with the carriers. DAMN, in the US you have to pay to RECEIVE a message. It's something totally different against the rest of the world. And now it looks like for WP7 there will be huge agreements with carriers for subsidizing. I will never buy a susidized phone for myself. For my business and if it is convenient yes, but not for my private life.
Everything is centered on the service, the HW is a surplus. As baron BIC said once, gift them with razors because they will buy blades. Sorry, I want to decide my blades.
Again on topic, I think momcilo centered well the matter. We have to fix a path, and then to start following it.
About option 1, I discarded it because I don't think it will happen. Let's say if we have any news from the Council, but I sincerely am not hoping anything from Nokia, sorry. I will be glad to be wrong.

momcilo 2011-08-10 15:17
Re: [Council] Council_Update-July_2011
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jurop88 (Post 1067325)
I am one of them who thinks Microsoft put Elop at the head of Nokia in order to let them abandon the open source path. Nobody of us knows the truth except the actors, but looking at the N9 launch, it looks like all that (Elop->Symbian->Meego affairs) had been done because it was dangerous to leave IBM and Nokia to act together.
Sorry, I was more focused on the issue of closed source drivers, and for a moment I thought there is a third party preventing Nokia from releasing open source drivers for 770/N800/N810. *sigh*

Council members: what was the voice of The Creator?

tekki 2011-08-10 16:15
Re: [Council] Council_Update-July_2011
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by momcilo (Post 1067284)
For n900 that is done by stskeeps in the form of closed sourced binaries. That excludes maemo devices 770/N800/N810 pretty much. For maemo devices we might have following choices:
Nothing proper and sustainable can be done for those devices before you have an modern kernel version running and DVFS/cpufreq working, ie power management. Supposedly patches exist for omap2 but someone needs to make it work on those devices.

Second problem is size of kernel. Modern kernels dont fit in 2mb. Someone once made uboot for N8x0, maybe someone can do that.

momcilo 2011-08-10 16:54
Re: [Council] Council_Update-July_2011
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tekki (Post 1067359)
Nothing proper and sustainable can be done for those devices before you have an modern kernel version running and DVFS/cpufreq working, ie power management. Supposedly patches exist for omap2 but someone needs to make it work on those devices.

Second problem is size of kernel. Modern kernels dont fit in 2mb. Someone once made uboot for N8x0, maybe someone can do that.
I am not sure about 2m limitation. Kernel can be trimmed down, by moving things to modules. If that does not fit the requirements, perhaps kexec might be a proper solution.
As for patches for omap2, I think that 2.6.35 on ubuntu maverick has omap2 listed. I know this since I was playing with gentoo and beagleboard(omap3).

lma 2011-08-10 17:23
Re: [Council] Council_Update-July_2011
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tekki (Post 1067359)
Second problem is size of kernel. Modern kernels dont fit in 2mb.
Sure they do, a relatively recent openwrt build I happen to have around at the moment has produced a kernel (2.6.37) of 1338324 bytes.

tekki 2011-08-10 18:05
Re: [Council] Council_Update-July_2011
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lma (Post 1067383)
Sure they do, a relatively recent openwrt build I happen to have around at the moment has produced a kernel (2.6.37) of 1338324 bytes.
One less problem then :)

Can we find volunteers to get a cpufreq kernel going based on linux-omap? It will help no matter if it is Debian, Ubuntu, MeeGo or whatever

lma 2011-08-10 18:32
Re: [Council] Council_Update-July_2011
 
I'm not sure that there is a cpufreq issue, at least openwrt seemed to scale fine last time I tried it. Their patches on top of vanilla kernel.org are here.

Estel 2011-08-18 19:28
Re: [Council] Council_Update-July_2011
 
I just like to say that for a long time I haven't browsed through 3 pages (in line) of such useful, meritocratic and informative discussion. Really, respect for You guys.

I would also opt for "softer" option 4 - main focus on new way, while providing things for older devices when we can (and it doesn't require months of work). I also think there still be bunch of people developing things for older devices, and there is no problem with "new way" people cooperating with "them", or even being on both "camps" at the same time ;)

I mean that if someone provide more openness for legacy devices, our new "foundation" should be open and helpful, but main goal fixed as "new way".

Ho ever, since developing first really "our" software/hardware (CordiaTAB, if it will be proved to most independent?), we should try to keep as tight "compatibility" with it (in case of even further devices/system versions), as it's possible. So, literally, we start new things, and people who "follow" us (I mean not only developers - average Joey the (power) user, who buy device), can be sure that his device from "our" legacy won't be left dead after 2 years.

Just my 2 cents, from guy much-more-(power)user-than-dev. what do you think about it?


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:42.
Page 41 of 41 « First 313940 41
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

vBulletin® Version 3.8.8