Re: F20 Beta-5 on BeagleBone Black

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Hash: SHA1

El Wed, 20 Nov 2013 05:44:18 +1000
Adrian <vk4tux@xxxxxxxxxxx> escribió:
> I had the same experience with the beaglebone black, No hdmi and no
> usb support = no good.
> Why bother releasing an image that is not functional. I am a big
> fedora fan & promoter, but I went
>  to debian wheezy 7.2 for my BBB ham radio setup. I create HR rpm's
> for arm systems and 
> Pidora 19 alpa is a disappointment with the repository in a mess, too
> many 'missing requires' ;
> No ftdi support in the base image kernel, not able to update kernel
> getting 'obsoleted' etc.
> I can install my rpms ok, but cannot connect a ftdi device to use it.
> I intend to do this software in rpm's for Pidora 19 & BBB > Fedora 20
> when it is ready.
> I wonder why Debian are so far in front of Fedora on these fronts?
> Fedora always had a reputation for great hardware support, but not
> here not now.
> Adrian ... vk4tux
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis Gilmore <dennis@xxxxxxxx>
> To: arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re:  F20 Beta-5 on BeagleBone Black
> Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 12:41:06 -0600
> El Tue, 19 Nov 2013 16:20:43 +0100
> Jos Vos <jos@xxxxxx> escribió:
> > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:09:47AM -0500, Robert Knight wrote:
> > 
> > > I used a Fedora 20 Beta system running on a x86_64, running
> > > minicom, to connect to the BeagleBone Black through a USB serial
> > > adapter.  I was trying to provide enough details so that the
> > > experiment could be repeated.
> > 
> > OK.  But my problem is that the BBB not even seems to start booting
> > with the F20 image, even none of the USR LEDs turn on.
> > 
> > When booting the Debian image in exactly the same way (even the same
> > microSD card), the LEDs turn on after a second or so (and then I
> > release the boot button) and Debian boots fine.
> > 
> > I have currently nothing attached to the BBB, only a network cable
> > and a power cable (USB or external, I tried both in both scenarios).
> > Could that be a problem?

The issue is that Debian is willing to take a bunch of forked kernels
and not care if the support makes it to the mainline kernel, where in
Fedora we closely follow the mainline linux kernel tree, which is what
we ship.  things are getting better and vendors are realising that they
need to get things upstream.

its a matter of Fedora is doing the right thing for the greater good
and some other distros are taking shortcuts for short term gain. 

First boot of a Fedora release initial-setup runs and you are prompted
for configuring the system, there are ways around it but thats a
different discussion.

Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

arm mailing list

[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM (Vger)]     [Linux ARM]     [ARM Kernel]     [Fedora User Discussion]     [Older Fedora Users Discussion]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Coolkey]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [Linux Apps]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Asterisk PBX]

Powered by Linux