[Arm-netbook] Block Diagram - ZEOMA - Handheld Games Console

[GaCuest]

Hello everyone.

I suppose many of you know the handheld games console project
based on EOMA68 (the provisional name is ZEOMA).

The website (it is outdated (the images are also outdated), when the
project is more advanced I'll update) (thanks to Peter Bouda) is:
http://www.ubrew.it/

The features of the console are:
- 4.5 inch 480x854 IPS screen.
- Resistive touch panel.
- DPad + A B X Y buttons + R button + L button + 2 Analog triggers
+ 2 Analog Joystick (with push button) + Start + Select + Home
+ Vol +/- + 2 extra buttons.
- 4000 mAh battery.
- Stereo.
- MicroSD slot.
- USB 2.0 Host.
- MicroUSB (for charging).
- STM32F072 for controls.
- AR9271 WIFI.

I have done a small block diagram you can see here:
Loading Image...

I have placed the datasheets of the components here:
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Datasheets%20ZEOMA/

I have no prior experience designing schematics and PCB, but I will
try to do my best. If I have any questions, I will ask you.

I will publish all the schematics and PCB under GPLv3+.

If anyone have any suggestions or improvement, I appreciate it.

Thanks to Luke for all his help. Also thanks to Alexander for allowing
us to store the files of the project in his server.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netbook@

[FaTony]

What kind of games are you planning to run?

Because this is very libre focused project so I assume emulators of
proprietary hardware and proprietary games for that hardware out of the
question.

Post by GaCuest
Hello everyone.
I suppose many of you know the handheld games console project
based on EOMA68 (the provisional name is ZEOMA).
The website (it is outdated (the images are also outdated), when the
http://www.ubrew.it/
- 4.5 inch 480x854 IPS screen.
- Resistive touch panel.
- DPad + A B X Y buttons + R button + L button + 2 Analog triggers
+ 2 Analog Joystick (with push button) + Start + Select + Home
+ Vol +/- + 2 extra buttons.
- 4000 mAh battery.
- Stereo.
- MicroSD slot.
- USB 2.0 Host.
- MicroUSB (for charging).
- STM32F072 for controls.
- AR9271 WIFI.
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Block%20Diagram%20ZEOMA/Block%20Diagram%20Console%202.0.jpg
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Datasheets%20ZEOMA/
I have no prior experience designing schematics and PCB, but I will
try to do my best. If I have any questions, I will ask you.
I will publish all the schematics and PCB under GPLv3+.
If anyone have any suggestions or improvement, I appreciate it.
Thanks to Luke for all his help. Also thanks to Alexander for allowing
us to store the files of the project in his server.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

[ryan]

Actually, I personally take a hybdrid approach to my libre software. I
focus on the important components being libre, but if some high-level
software isn't, I can live with that as long as I'm not dependent on it.


So with that in mind, I know I would play some emulators on there. Also,
if we just focus the EOMA68 projects on fully-libre usecases, we will
miss out on many mainstream users who are necessary if we want the
standard (or whatever revision its reached by then) to be at all
relevant in 20 years. I like the idea of 100% libre hardware and a 100%
libre software stack, but with easy options for the user to choose to
add non-free components if they wish (like the Debian non-free
repository being only a couple of clicks away)

Thanks

-Ryan

Post by FaTony
What kind of games are you planning to run?
Because this is very libre focused project so I assume emulators of
proprietary hardware and proprietary games for that hardware out of the
question.

Post by GaCuest
Hello everyone.
I suppose many of you know the handheld games console project
based on EOMA68 (the provisional name is ZEOMA).
The website (it is outdated (the images are also outdated), when the
http://www.ubrew.it/
- 4.5 inch 480x854 IPS screen.
- Resistive touch panel.
- DPad + A B X Y buttons + R button + L button + 2 Analog triggers
+ 2 Analog Joystick (with push button) + Start + Select + Home
+ Vol +/- + 2 extra buttons.
- 4000 mAh battery.
- Stereo.
- MicroSD slot.
- USB 2.0 Host.
- MicroUSB (for charging).
- STM32F072 for controls.
- AR9271 WIFI.
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Block%20Diagram%20ZEOMA/Block%20Diagram%20Console%202.0.jpg
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Datasheets%20ZEOMA/
I have no prior experience designing schematics and PCB, but I will
try to do my best. If I have any questions, I will ask you.
I will publish all the schematics and PCB under GPLv3+.
If anyone have any suggestions or improvement, I appreciate it.
Thanks to Luke for all his help. Also thanks to Alexander for allowing
us to store the files of the project in his server.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

[mdn]

Debian's approach of this isn't really ethical.
Anyone has the freedom of install installing propitiatory software even
non tech users.

Including non-free software in the repository is insisting/proposing
users, especially non tech ones, to give up their freedom for simplicity
without understanding the importance of them and the technical problems
that non free/libre software brings (a good example of that is the game
modding community).

Mainstreams users like you seem to refer to them are what makes software
and hardware go in decadence.
I don't say that they are directly concerned, but it is how their were
treated like, that made them what they are now and ask the same bad
products.

If you continue to give them what they are made of the project will
slowly become like them and only enforce the already bad circle.

Their are already lots of free software games, seek the libre game wiki
encyclopedia.
https://libregamewiki.org/Main_Page

Note: emulators can be free software but the roms/blobs shouldn’t be
included, f-droid already does that.

Post by ryan
Actually, I personally take a hybdrid approach to my libre software. I
focus on the important components being libre, but if some high-level
software isn't, I can live with that as long as I'm not dependent on it.
So with that in mind, I know I would play some emulators on there. Also,
if we just focus the EOMA68 projects on fully-libre usecases, we will
miss out on many mainstream users who are necessary if we want the
standard (or whatever revision its reached by then) to be at all
relevant in 20 years. I like the idea of 100% libre hardware and a 100%
libre software stack, but with easy options for the user to choose to
add non-free components if they wish (like the Debian non-free
repository being only a couple of clicks away)
Thanks
-Ryan

Post by FaTony
What kind of games are you planning to run?
Because this is very libre focused project so I assume emulators of
proprietary hardware and proprietary games for that hardware out of the
question.

Post by GaCuest
Hello everyone.
I suppose many of you know the handheld games console project
based on EOMA68 (the provisional name is ZEOMA).
The website (it is outdated (the images are also outdated), when the
http://www.ubrew.it/
- 4.5 inch 480x854 IPS screen.
- Resistive touch panel.
- DPad + A B X Y buttons + R button + L button + 2 Analog triggers
+ 2 Analog Joystick (with push button) + Start + Select + Home
+ Vol +/- + 2 extra buttons.
- 4000 mAh battery.
- Stereo.
- MicroSD slot.
- USB 2.0 Host.
- MicroUSB (for charging).
- STM32F072 for controls.
- AR9271 WIFI.
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Block%20Diagram%20ZEOMA/Block%20Diagram%20Console%202.0.jpg
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Datasheets%20ZEOMA/
I have no prior experience designing schematics and PCB, but I will
try to do my best. If I have any questions, I will ask you.
I will publish all the schematics and PCB under GPLv3+.
If anyone have any suggestions or improvement, I appreciate it.
Thanks to Luke for all his help. Also thanks to Alexander for allowing
us to store the files of the project in his server.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

Post by mdn
Debian's approach of this isn't really ethical.

they're doing the best that they believe they can do, but they _have_
been told. see joey hess's very public description of the Debian
Charter as a "toxic document".

i've spoken to the FSF about this: from what i gather, the changes
required are actually very very simple: all they have to do is add in
a simple popup message whenever someone clicks the "nonfree" section,
issuing a warning to the end-user that the consequences of their
actions are leading them into unethical territory.

... how simple would that be to add?

the other parts (creating separate DNS names and different
repositories for the nonfree sections) could be done transparently
with HTTP rewrites and redirects (just like devuan seems to be doing)
as an interim measure, then removed at some appropriate point after a
couple of major releases.

it's really, really not very hard, and we'd end up with Debian - one
of the world's leading Software Libre OSes - being RYF Compliant.

as it is, we have to fuck around forking tens of THOUSANDs of
packages, with efforts to do so failing under the sheer weight of the
task and the required resources.

i really really wish the debian group would wake up, just a little bit.

*sigh*.

l.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send

[mdn]

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton

Post by mdn
Debian's approach of this isn't really ethical.

they're doing the best that they believe they can do, but they _have_
been told. see joey hess's very public description of the Debian
Charter as a "toxic document".

Tanks for the reference

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
i've spoken to the FSF about this: from what i gather, the changes
required are actually very very simple: all they have to do is add in
a simple popup message whenever someone clicks the "nonfree" section,
issuing a warning to the end-user that the consequences of their
actions are leading them into unethical territory.
... how simple would that be to add?

Not a all, but that was a rhetoric question.
I am looking forward to make pedagogic help for basic users, I was one
myself and I know that even a bit of more help (more that just a popup)
isn’t that hard to help, it's just very time consuming.

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
the other parts (creating separate DNS names and different
repositories for the nonfree sections) could be done transparently
with HTTP rewrites and redirects (just like devuan seems to be doing)
as an interim measure, then removed at some appropriate point after a
couple of major releases.
it's really, really not very hard, and we'd end up with Debian - one
of the world's leading Software Libre OSes - being RYF Compliant.
as it is, we have to fuck around forking tens of THOUSANDs of
packages, with efforts to do so failing under the sheer weight of the
task and the required resources.

Agreed

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
i really really wish the debian group would wake up, just a little bit.

((trolling) same thing with systemd I wish debian would wake up)

Sorry I couldn't resist ^^

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
*sigh*.
l.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

[Andrew M.A. Cater]

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton

Post by mdn
Debian's approach of this isn't really ethical.

they're doing the best that they believe they can do, but they _have_
been told. see joey hess's very public description of the Debian
Charter as a "toxic document".
i've spoken to the FSF about this: from what i gather, the changes
required are actually very very simple: all they have to do is add in
a simple popup message whenever someone clicks the "nonfree" section,
issuing a warning to the end-user that the consequences of their
actions are leading them into unethical territory.

Debian and the FSF have agreed to differ on this: Debian folk have problems
with GFDL with invariant sections, for example. Ask John Sullivan what
the FSF posiiton is.

Non-free is NOT a part of Debian, nor is contrib - but they are provided
as a covenience for users. It's also worth knowing that security updates
for non-free are almost impossible.

BUT ... If you've got a Broadcom chipset, for example, you may have no option but to use
proprietary software. Most Intel wifi chips also require firmware - what are you going
to do when that's emebedded in a new laptop / nettop ?

They repostiories do have to be explicitly enabled: the question of whether you want
to install non-free software is asked explicitly in the installer - so the notifications
are there.

Ironically, if wifi adapters / Ethernet cards still came with burnt-in firmware,
Debian would be a fully free distribution (and it's worth remembering that Debian
was endorsed and funded by the FSF for a while).

If you want any architecture other than Intel / AMD as a primary supported architecture
then your choice is prety much Debian from the mainstream distributions and Trisquel / GNewsense
are forks which don't yet support all other architectures. So, if you want to do work to
enable your project on a Cubietruck - you use Debian, probably.

Andy C

NOT SPEAKING FOR DEBIAN PROJECT AS A WHOLE :)

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
... how simple would that be to add?
the other parts (creating separate DNS names and different
repositories for the nonfree sections) could be done transparently
with HTTP rewrites and redirects (just like devuan seems to be doing)
as an interim measure, then removed at some appropriate point after a
couple of major releases.
it's really, really not very hard, and we'd end up with Debian - one
of the world's leading Software Libre OSes - being RYF Compliant.
as it is, we have to fuck around forking tens of THOUSANDs of
packages, with efforts to do so failing under the sheer weight of the
task and the required resources.
i really really wish the debian group would wake up, just a little bit.
*sigh*.
l.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attach

[J.B. Nicholson]

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
they're doing the best that they believe they can do, but they _have_
been told. see joey hess's very public description of the Debian
Charter as a "toxic document".

I've seen https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00174.html where
Hess makes this statement but I haven't seen anything written by Hess
clearly explaining why the Debian Constitution is "toxic".

Where would I find something written by Hess clearly explaining why the
Debian Constitution is "toxic"?

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
i've spoken to the FSF about this: from what i gather, the changes
required are actually very very simple: all they have to do is add in
a simple popup message whenever someone clicks the "nonfree" section,
issuing a warning to the end-user that the consequences of their
actions are leading them into unethical territory.
... how simple would that be to add?

It's entirely possible something has changed and I am not aware of relevant
updates on this (I don't doubt you're in touch with them far more than I
am). Please do reply to the list with updates to this situation.

But according to published documents I point to below, a popup might be
quite simple to add but insufficient to allow Debian GNU/Linux to appear on
the list of FSF Free System Distributions. I'll explain why I believe this
to be true.

In https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html we find the following
objection, "Debian also provides a repository of nonfree software.
According to the project, this software is "not part of the Debian system,"
but the repository is hosted on many of the project's main servers, and
people can readily find these nonfree packages by browsing Debian's online
package database and its wiki".

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
So, in Debian's case, the lack of endorsement from us is primarily
because of the relationship between official Debian and unofficial
Debian -- the 'non-free' and 'contrib' repositories. And that
relationship to us seems too close for our comfort. There are spots in
the Debian infrastructure where those sections even though technically
separate are integrated very closely with main. So, for example, in
package searching, in 'recommends' and 'suggests' fields within packages
that are displayed to users. So even though, in Debian, we have an idea
that these are separate that's not always as clear to users on the
outside and they can end up being sometimes inadvertently or sometimes
just led to install nonfree components on top of the official
distribution.

Source:
http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2015/debconf15/Debian_and_the_FSF_Ending_disagreements_by_solving_problems_at_the_source.webm
(12m18s)

I believe the FSF is right to point out Debian's cognitive dissonance.
Debian gets to:

- host repos containing nonfree software,
- include UI with pointers to said repos in the installed repo list,
- list packages from the nonfree repos as alternatives to free software
packages,
- and also claim that these repos are somehow "not part of the Debian system"?

I too believe that Debian is hosting nonfree software and integrating
nonfree software with free software and this is indistinguishable from what
other distros not listed do (such as Ubuntu's GNU/Linux).

If Debian wanted the FSF's approval Debian could remove the nonfree and
contrib repos from Debian entirely, and remove mentions of packages from
these repos from the free packages. Any packages one installs from Debian's
repos post-installation would have the same restrictions too (thus
addressing what Sullivan mentioned immediately after the above quote).

It was good of Debian to move the nonfree blobs to the nonfree and/or
contrib repos in Debian 6.0 ("squeeze") in February 2011 but the OS
installer makes the same kinds of recommendations the FSF objects to. I
understand the consequences for users looking to most conveniently install
Debian GNU/Linux plus whatever nonfree software to let the OS run on their
hardware. But I don't see a popup fixing this. I see this as another
convenience vs. software freedom tradeoff (wherein security is certainly on
the side of software freedom too).

Repo redirects to sets of packages that only mention free software packages
with no references to nonfree software could work but that still involves
providing work for thousands of packages, as you say.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-net

[Andrew M.A. Cater]

Post by J.B. Nicholson
I've seen https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00174.html where
Hess makes this statement but I haven't seen anything written by Hess
clearly explaining why the Debian Constitution is "toxic".

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
i've spoken to the FSF about this: from what i gather, the changes
required are actually very very simple: all they have to do is add in
a simple popup message whenever someone clicks the "nonfree" section,
issuing a warning to the end-user that the consequences of their
actions are leading them into unethical territory.
... how simple would that be to add?

Pick up the Debian netinst iso / the first Debian CD / the first Debian DVD.

You can install an entirely free system with no non-free components.

You can also install Debian without taking account of any recommends.

On (both) the Thinkpads in front of me, that would result in non-working wifi
but everything else would work. I could plug in one of a few wifi dongles
and have a fully free Debian.

On the Intel desktop machine away behind me I couldn't get hardware acceleration
on the Nvidia card - I could care less.

On a Cubietruck / Pine64 / Chip / Raspberry Pi / Pi3 - I couldn't get functionality
without non-free which I could get with Allwinner / Broadcom firmware. Debian
doesn't supply "non-free" components: in each case you're using firmware distributed
with the hardware. Without non-free firmware / forked kernels, all of the ARM hardware
we have is pretty much unusable. I'm hopeful that you can prove differently Luke.

Post by J.B. Nicholson
But according to published documents I point to below, a popup might be
quite simple to add but insufficient to allow Debian GNU/Linux to appear on
the list of FSF Free System Distributions. I'll explain why I believe this
to be true.
In https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html we find the following
objection, "Debian also provides a repository of nonfree software. According
to the project, this software is "not part of the Debian system," but the
repository is hosted on many of the project's main servers, and people can
readily find these nonfree packages by browsing Debian's online package
database and its wiki".

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
So, in Debian's case, the lack of endorsement from us is primarily
because of the relationship between official Debian and unofficial
Debian -- the 'non-free' and 'contrib' repositories. And that
relationship to us seems too close for our comfort. There are spots in
the Debian infrastructure where those sections even though technically
separate are integrated very closely with main. So, for example, in
package searching, in 'recommends' and 'suggests' fields within packages
that are displayed to users. So even though, in Debian, we have an idea
that these are separate that's not always as clear to users on the
outside and they can end up being sometimes inadvertently or sometimes
just led to install nonfree components on top of the official
distribution.

Source: http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2015/debconf15/Debian_and_the_FSF_Ending_disagreements_by_solving_problems_at_the_source.webm
(12m18s)

Where would you suggest that Debian point users with unusable hardware - note (_users_ not developers) ?

It's very clear on the website and in documentation back to 1994

www.debian.org/CD/netinst - no mention of non-free

https://www.debian.org/CD/faq#official - unofficial CDs may contain additional hardware drivers, or additional software packages not part of the archive.

Post by J.B. Nicholson
I believe the FSF is right to point out Debian's cognitive dissonance.
- host repos containing nonfree software,
- include UI with pointers to said repos in the installed repo list,
- list packages from the nonfree repos as alternatives to free software
packages,
- and also claim that these repos are somehow "not part of the Debian system"?
I too believe that Debian is hosting nonfree software and integrating
nonfree software with free software and this is indistinguishable from what
other distros not listed do (such as Ubuntu's GNU/Linux).
If Debian wanted the FSF's approval Debian could remove the nonfree and
contrib repos from Debian entirely, and remove mentions of packages from
these repos from the free packages. Any packages one installs from Debian's
repos post-installation would have the same restrictions too (thus
addressing what Sullivan mentioned immediately after the above quote).
It was good of Debian to move the nonfree blobs to the nonfree and/or
contrib repos in Debian 6.0 ("squeeze") in February 2011 but the OS
installer makes the same kinds of recommendations the FSF objects to. I
understand the consequences for users looking to most conveniently install
Debian GNU/Linux plus whatever nonfree software to let the OS run on their
hardware. But I don't see a popup fixing this. I see this as another
convenience vs. software freedom tradeoff (wherein security is certainly on
the side of software freedom too).
Repo redirects to sets of packages that only mention free software packages
with no references to nonfree software could work but that still involves
providing work for thousands of packages, as you say.

Genuinely: run through a Debian install from the netinst / CDs. Please point out to me where non-free software will be installed without an explicit
action to include nonfree software on the part of the person installing. The screen mentioning non-free mentions that hardware drivers that may be
required may be non-free but you have to opt in to install them.

All the best

Andy C

[still not speaking for the Debian project]

Post by J.B. Nicholson
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb

[J.B. Nicholson]

Post by Andrew M.A. Cater
You can install an entirely free system with no non-free components.
You can also install Debian without taking account of any recommends.

But the recommends and suggests fields are still listing nonfree software,
which was the FSF's issue. Not accepting the suggestions or recommendations
doesn't address the issue the FSF raised in Sullivan's DebConf talk.

Post by Andrew M.A. Cater
Where would you suggest that Debian point users with unusable hardware -
note (_users_ not developers) ?

Developers are users too. But where I would point them doesn't matter.
These are the FSF's requirements we're talking about. Although I don't
speak for the FSF, I believe they'd point any computer user to the FSF's
"Respects Your Freedom" hardware (such as what the FSF itself uses) and I
believe they'd point out that sometimes freedom requires a sacrifice (as
rms points out in all of his talks going back many years). One might not be
able to use just any hardware with a Debian GNU/Linux system that satisfies
the FSF's recommended distro list.

Post by Andrew M.A. Cater
Genuinely: run through a Debian install from the netinst / CDs. Please
point out to me where non-free software will be installed without an
explicit action to include nonfree software on the part of the person
installing. The screen mentioning non-free mentions that hardware
drivers that may be required may be non-free but you have to opt in to
install them.

Which suggests the nonfree software integration the FSF spoke of is in
there. After all, like you just said, if it's an opt-in away to get the
nonfree software the nonfree repos are listed but not enabled until one
answers "yes" to activate the nonfree repos Debian hosts. If this isn't the
case, and the FSF's requests are being met it's a simple matter for someone
from Debian to submit the latest Debian GNU/Linux for a proper review and
possible inclusion on the list.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netbo

[Elena ``of Valhalla'']

Post by J.B. Nicholson

Post by Andrew M.A. Cater
You can install an entirely free system with no non-free components.
You can also install Debian without taking account of any recommends.

But the recommends and suggests fields are still listing nonfree software,
which was the FSF's issue. Not accepting the suggestions or recommendations
doesn't address the issue the FSF raised in Sullivan's DebConf talk.

Suggests, yes, but Recommends to software in non-free shouldn't be there
as they are forbidden by the policy

https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-main

If you find one, please file a bug so that it can be removed (either
because the Recommends wasn't really supposed to be there, or by moving
the package to contrib, if it really needs non-free software to work)

[Stefan Monnier]

Post by J.B. Nicholson
Which suggests the nonfree software integration the FSF spoke of is in
there. After all, like you just said, if it's an opt-in away to get the
nonfree software the nonfree repos are listed but not enabled until one
answers "yes" to activate the nonfree repos Debian hosts. If this isn't the
case, and the FSF's requests are being met it's a simple matter for someone
from Debian to submit the latest Debian GNU/Linux for a proper review and
possible inclusion on the list.

I wish Debian and the FSF would work together to resolve this issue.
It shouldn't be that hard to modify Debian so that `non-free` is only ever
used based on an explicit user request (and to let the user specify
that this explicit request only applies this one time).

Along the same lines, the `non-free` section should be split in two:
`proprietary`, `non-dfsg`, where the `non-dfsg` part would only contain
packages which the DFSG rejects as non-free but which many people in the
Free Software world consider Free nevertheless (basically FSF's docs).


Stefan


_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb

[Elena ``of Valhalla'']

Post by Stefan Monnier
I wish Debian and the FSF would work together to resolve this issue.

They are, more or less: there has been quite some activity a few years
ago which lead to some changes, but work seems to have stalled
(the `mailing list`_ isn't seeing much traffic lately)

.. _`mailing list`: https://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/fsf-collab-discuss

I suspect that what changes could be agreed on have been done, while
most other cases are points where they had to agree to disagree, such as
the freedom status of the FSF docs and the existence of non-free.

I see that there has been a BOF_ about collaboration between Debian and
the FSF at the latest Debconf, but I haven't seen the video, so I don't
know what was said (yet, I may have just found something to watch in the
near future)

Post by Stefan Monnier
It shouldn't be that hard to modify Debian so that `non-free` is only ever
used based on an explicit user request (and to let the user specify
that this explicit request only applies this one time).

It is, already. users already have to explicitely accept (in some cases that
involve hardware support) or request (in all other cases) that non-free
is enabled.

There is disagreement on how hard it should be to do so, with the FSF
considering what Debian choose to do "too easy".

Post by Stefan Monnier
`proprietary`, `non-dfsg`, where the `non-dfsg` part would only contain
packages which the DFSG rejects as non-free but which many people in the
Free Software world consider Free nevertheless (basically FSF's docs).

If something is not-DFSG is by definition proprietary as far as Debian
is concerned.

There have been talks about dividing non-free, however, splitting out
the firmwares (that lots of people consider a necessary evil for another
few years), documentation (for which some people including the FSF tend
to have lower requirements) and everything else (the really evil stuff)

There was agreement on this split, but I suspect that it has been stuck
in a lack of volunteer time.

[Elena ``of Valhalla'']

Post by Elena ``of Valhalla''
I see that there has been a BOF_ about collaboration between Debian and
the FSF at the latest Debconf, but I haven't seen the video, so I don't
know what was said (yet, I may have just found something to watch in the
near future)

apparently I a) forgot the link, which is
https://debconf16.debconf.org/talks/91/ b) forgot that I did try to
watch that video, but it's missing the first 20 minutes or so of audio
(it's in the known issues at
http://ftp.acc.umu.se/pub/debian-meetings/2016/debconf16/README.txt )

[FaTony]

Of course, you can install a fully free Debian system, but 1 single
dialog in setup wizard is a bit too little.

I would rather have the tickbox to install non-free repos somewhere deep
in preferences menu and I would certainly not host them on the
debian.org domain.

Ideally, you would only add non-free repo by manually editing sources.list.

Post by Andrew M.A. Cater

Post by J.B. Nicholson
I've seen https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00174.html where
Hess makes this statement but I haven't seen anything written by Hess
clearly explaining why the Debian Constitution is "toxic".

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
i've spoken to the FSF about this: from what i gather, the changes
required are actually very very simple: all they have to do is add in
a simple popup message whenever someone clicks the "nonfree" section,
issuing a warning to the end-user that the consequences of their
actions are leading them into unethical territory.
... how simple would that be to add?

Pick up the Debian netinst iso / the first Debian CD / the first Debian DVD.
You can install an entirely free system with no non-free components.
You can also install Debian without taking account of any recommends.
On (both) the Thinkpads in front of me, that would result in non-working wifi
but everything else would work. I could plug in one of a few wifi dongles
and have a fully free Debian.
On the Intel desktop machine away behind me I couldn't get hardware acceleration
on the Nvidia card - I could care less.
On a Cubietruck / Pine64 / Chip / Raspberry Pi / Pi3 - I couldn't get functionality
without non-free which I could get with Allwinner / Broadcom firmware. Debian
doesn't supply "non-free" components: in each case you're using firmware distributed
with the hardware. Without non-free firmware / forked kernels, all of the ARM hardware
we have is pretty much unusable. I'm hopeful that you can prove differently Luke.

Post by J.B. Nicholson
But according to published documents I point to below, a popup might be
quite simple to add but insufficient to allow Debian GNU/Linux to appear on
the list of FSF Free System Distributions. I'll explain why I believe this
to be true.
In https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html we find the following
objection, "Debian also provides a repository of nonfree software. According
to the project, this software is "not part of the Debian system," but the
repository is hosted on many of the project's main servers, and people can
readily find these nonfree packages by browsing Debian's online package
database and its wiki".

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
So, in Debian's case, the lack of endorsement from us is primarily
because of the relationship between official Debian and unofficial
Debian -- the 'non-free' and 'contrib' repositories. And that
relationship to us seems too close for our comfort. There are spots in
the Debian infrastructure where those sections even though technically
separate are integrated very closely with main. So, for example, in
package searching, in 'recommends' and 'suggests' fields within packages
that are displayed to users. So even though, in Debian, we have an idea
that these are separate that's not always as clear to users on the
outside and they can end up being sometimes inadvertently or sometimes
just led to install nonfree components on top of the official
distribution.

Source: http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2015/debconf15/Debian_and_the_FSF_Ending_disagreements_by_solving_problems_at_the_source.webm
(12m18s)

Where would you suggest that Debian point users with unusable hardware - note (_users_ not developers) ?
It's very clear on the website and in documentation back to 1994
www.debian.org/CD/netinst - no mention of non-free
https://www.debian.org/CD/faq#official - unofficial CDs may contain additional hardware drivers, or additional software packages not part of the archive.

Post by J.B. Nicholson
I believe the FSF is right to point out Debian's cognitive dissonance.
- host repos containing nonfree software,
- include UI with pointers to said repos in the installed repo list,
- list packages from the nonfree repos as alternatives to free software
packages,
- and also claim that these repos are somehow "not part of the Debian system"?
I too believe that Debian is hosting nonfree software and integrating
nonfree software with free software and this is indistinguishable from what
other distros not listed do (such as Ubuntu's GNU/Linux).
If Debian wanted the FSF's approval Debian could remove the nonfree and
contrib repos from Debian entirely, and remove mentions of packages from
these repos from the free packages. Any packages one installs from Debian's
repos post-installation would have the same restrictions too (thus
addressing what Sullivan mentioned immediately after the above quote).
It was good of Debian to move the nonfree blobs to the nonfree and/or
contrib repos in Debian 6.0 ("squeeze") in February 2011 but the OS
installer makes the same kinds of recommendations the FSF objects to. I
understand the consequences for users looking to most conveniently install
Debian GNU/Linux plus whatever nonfree software to let the OS run on their
hardware. But I don't see a popup fixing this. I see this as another
convenience vs. software freedom tradeoff (wherein security is certainly on
the side of software freedom too).
Repo redirects to sets of packages that only mention free software packages
with no references to nonfree software could work but that still involves
providing work for thousands of packages, as you say.

Genuinely: run through a Debian install from the netinst / CDs. Please point out to me where non-free software will be installed without an explicit
action to include nonfree software on the part of the person installing. The screen mentioning non-free mentions that hardware drivers that may be
required may be non-free but you have to opt in to install them.
All the best
Andy C
[still not speaking for the Debian project]

[Philip Hands]

Post by J.B. Nicholson

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
they're doing the best that they believe they can do, but they _have_
been told. see joey hess's very public description of the Debian
Charter as a "toxic document".

I've seen https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00174.html where
Hess makes this statement but I haven't seen anything written by Hess
clearly explaining why the Debian Constitution is "toxic".
Where would I find something written by Hess clearly explaining why the
Debian Constitution is "toxic"?

Yes, it was the Debian Constitution he was referring to. I'm not really
sure why this is relevant to the discussion of free software, but I
suspect that Luke is conflating it with the Social Contract, and calling
it "Debian Charter" which is ... not a thing.

I think Joey was saying that the constitutions existence has resulted in
some people having endless discussions about the internal structures of
Debian, rather than getting on with something useful instead.

It has absolutely nothing to do with what Luke seems to be suggesting.

As for the non-free thing and the FSF -- changing things would require
Debian to consider that to be a good idea, which was certainly not the
case in 2004:

https://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_002

I doubt that opinion has changed.

Claiming that is related to being unethical, rather than a result of
people having differing proprieties, strikes me as rather childish.

On this laptop, I note that I have 4 packages installed from "non-free".
One is firmware-iwlwifi, and the other 3 are GFDL licensed docs with
invariant sections. I suppose I could buy another wifi card (perhaps
one with the same chipset, with the same firmware, in a ROM?).

Then I could chuck the old card into landfill for an "ethical" outcome.

Cheers, Phil.

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

Post by Philip Hands

Post by J.B. Nicholson

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
they're doing the best that they believe they can do, but they _have_
been told. see joey hess's very public description of the Debian
Charter as a "toxic document".

I've seen https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00174.html where
Hess makes this statement but I haven't seen anything written by Hess
clearly explaining why the Debian Constitution is "toxic".
Where would I find something written by Hess clearly explaining why the
Debian Constitution is "toxic"?

Yes, it was the Debian Constitution he was referring to. I'm not really
sure why this is relevant to the discussion of free software, but I

i'm beginning to appreciate that everything we're doing boils down to
the extremely rare combination of applying ethics to software. where
we decide to "draw the line" on those ethics is where various groups
involved in free software (and "open source") is where we differ.

Post by Philip Hands
suspect that Luke is conflating it with the Social Contract, and calling
it "Debian Charter" which is ... not a thing.

yes. thanks for clarifying. so much to do, covering so many things,
i can't possibly recall all the details at the time that they're
needed, so thank you.

Post by Philip Hands
I think Joey was saying that the constitutions existence has resulted in
some people having endless discussions about the internal structures of
Debian, rather than getting on with something useful instead.
It has absolutely nothing to do with what Luke seems to be suggesting.
As for the non-free thing and the FSF -- changing things would require
Debian to consider that to be a good idea, which was certainly not the
https://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_002
I doubt that opinion has changed.
Claiming that is related to being unethical, rather than a result of
people having differing proprieties, strikes me as rather childish.
On this laptop, I note that I have 4 packages installed from "non-free".
One is firmware-iwlwifi, and the other 3 are GFDL licensed docs with
invariant sections. I suppose I could buy another wifi card (perhaps
one with the same chipset, with the same firmware, in a ROM?).

or one where the source code of the firmware is entirely libre.

Post by Philip Hands
Then I could chuck the old card into landfill for an "ethical" outcome.

indeed. ha. i like the irony of throwing the old one away.

you could view that action (replacing the card) as being one of
convenience. thinkpenguin have a stack of available cards (just for
goodness sake get the right one.... there's a "standard" that isn't
actually a standard..)

apologies for explaining this if you're already aware of it phil (i'm
explaining for other people's benefit) but if you got one of those
cards, then when you next come to upgrade, you like many people who
buy thinkpenguin's products that "just work", any issues with the
nonfree firmware being incompatible with the kernel as it was being
upgraded (or other similar issues) would *not happen*.

this "software libre is actually about taking away the stress and
inconvenience" is something that i really did not appreciate until
chris explained thinkpenguin's business model to me.

chris worked for linspire as a QA engineer. he got to see first-hand
that linspire's chances of ever being a pre-installed OS shipped out
by default along-side (or instead of) Windows was utterly negligeable.
that there was no chance whatsoever of winmodems working on
linux-based distros, and so on.

thus he formed the idea to *pre-vet* hardware and *only* sell a
comprehensive range of *pre-tested* products that have full libre
firmware (if any is required at all). as a result, he continues to
support 15-year-old distros to this day, and supplies *one percent* of
the world's WIFI dongles, which is an amazing achievement for a
company that only employs three people.

l.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netbook

[Wookey]

Post by J.B. Nicholson
I too believe that Debian is hosting nonfree software and integrating
nonfree software with free software and this is indistinguishable from what
other distros not listed do (such as Ubuntu's GNU/Linux).

There is a difference: Ubuntu will install non-free software (firmware
needed to make hardware work, and binary drivers) by default. Debian
will not do so unless the user adds the non-free repository (SFAIK).

Post by J.B. Nicholson
If Debian wanted the FSF's approval Debian could remove the nonfree and
contrib repos from Debian entirely, and remove mentions of packages from
these repos from the free packages.

They (we) could. Ironically a large fraction of the packages in
non-free are FSF documentation. Most of the rest is firmware blobs
(usually running on a different CPU from your main one).

Debian has taken the view for many years now that having this stuff
available relatively painlessly is the right balance between usability
and freedom. There have been suggestions made about putting firmware
in a different categary, as that's the main reason people enable
non-free, and once enabled you get all of it available, not just the
one or two bits you needed, and it would be good if it was less
all-or-nothing. Not sure where those changes got to.

I have 11 non-free packages. 5 of them are FSF documentation (gcc x2,
make, cpio, emacs). 4 others are firmware for this thinkpad (bluetooth
and wifi). In fact I even made and uploaded a non-free package:
cpio-doc as the cpio docs were not available on Debian without someone
doing that (have you tried using cpio without the docs? - it's hard
going). The others are tools installed for interacting with other
people, where free alternatives do not exist: unrar, nautilus-dropbox.

None of that is particularly unethical, except maybe the last two
packages, but whilst I am a big supporter of free software (that's why
I'm on this list), I think it's OK that Debian manages this stuff
properly for when one needs it: it's much better than having to go
find random binaries on line to install, for example.

I've just installed unrar-free, and removed nautilus-dropbox, as these
days one can use some non-free software online to do the same job,
when tiresome people send you things via that service. That's more
'FSF pure', but I don't think it really makes much ethical difference:
Dropbox is proprietary however you access it.

Wookey

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

Post by Wookey

Post by J.B. Nicholson
I too believe that Debian is hosting nonfree software and integrating
nonfree software with free software and this is indistinguishable from what
other distros not listed do (such as Ubuntu's GNU/Linux).

There is a difference: Ubuntu will install non-free software (firmware
needed to make hardware work, and binary drivers) by default. Debian
will not do so unless the user adds the non-free repository (SFAIK).

appreciated you pointing out the distinction / differenec, wookey. i
only became aware of the FSF's position from my conversations with
josh gay, some eight or so months ago. i've mentioned them on here
before: you may have missed them (i'm aware you're a lurker) so am
happy to repeat them in this context.

the FSF figures that technically-competent people can look after
themselves. "technically-competent" is defined as loosely fitting
with "someone who has the capacity to take the initiative to seek out
help online or from friends, where such help requires *explicit*
following (and trust of) *specific* instructions, step-by-step without
deviation or elaboration, usually at the command-line".

the FSF's position there covers *everyone else*, who, by definition,
cannot trust or be trusted to follow explicit written or verbal
instructions, cannot cope with a command-line prompt, cannot
comprehend the consequences of their actions, does not understand or
read "terms and conditions" and so on.

these are the people whom the FSF's position protects (from
themselves) - they are the people who are extremely likely to go
*click* synaptics package manager what's that it's not enabled *click*
i wonder what nonfree is don't understand don't care oh well let's
enable it anyway *click* oh look there's these extra packages i wonder
what they do *click* and now they've opened up a means to compromise
their computer and their privacy without *ever* encountering a warning
that that was even possible.

*that's* what the FSF objects to about debian. it's not that the
packages *are* separate, it's that it's *too easy* to install them
without any warning of any kind, whatsoever.

we as technical people just go in and edit /etc/apt/sources.list and
add "nonfree" to the end of the appropriate deb line. *non-technical*
people run synaptics and its ilke, where there's a GUI-based
no-warnings-whatsoever option *right there* in the menus / dialogs, to
enable non-free repositories.

anyway. thank you for making me aware that FSF documentation is
qualified as non-free, that really made my day.

l.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netboo

[Philip Hands]

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <***@lkcl.net> writes:

...

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
the FSF's position there covers *everyone else*, who, by definition,
cannot trust or be trusted to follow explicit written or verbal
instructions, cannot cope with a command-line prompt, cannot
comprehend the consequences of their actions, does not understand or
read "terms and conditions" and so on.

Right, so hardly Debian's target audience then.

It's all very well having something to cater to the non-technical folk,
and I applaud the effort, but you'll note that almost all of the "Libre"
OSs are actually Debian based, and if you made Debian unusable on most
of the hardware that Debian developers actually use (or are paid by
their employers to use) then all you'd do is make sure that they use
something else, so you wouldn't have the same mindshare in Debian, and
would end up with Debian being as poorly maintained as most of the
"libre" things you apparently wish we'd emulate.

The fact that some of the "libre" OSs base themselves on Ubuntu strikes
me as particularly deranged, given that Ubuntu is actually a step
further away from what they want, but there you go.

So, sure, use a Libre OS of you like the compromises they make, but be
aware that the main reason that you have the chance to do so is that
Debian has made different compromises in order to be popular enough to
be the default upstream for Linux, and thus has made it possible for
someone to create the Libre OS that you are running.

Giving us grief about ethics will not make things better for you.

When I got into Free Software, the way you ran things was to spend three
days recompiling GCC on your proprietary UNIX(TM) OS, followed by perl
etc. -- How useful would it have been to be purist about things then?

The place where one can draw the line has been slowly pushed towards the
hardware, but pretending that the masses are currently able or
interested in running on truly free hardware does not make it true. It
might even sabotage the effort to make it possible. After all, most
people are firmly clutching their android devices, totally unaware that
there's Free software inside, without even a temptation to look under
the surface.

It seems to me that we're all progressing towards the same destination,
even if via slightly differing routes. Reenacting "The Life of Brian's"
Splitters scene is just a way of not getting on with something useful
instead -- please give it a rest.

Cheers, Phil.

[Paul Boddie]

Post by Philip Hands
The fact that some of the "libre" OSs base themselves on Ubuntu strikes
me as particularly deranged, given that Ubuntu is actually a step
further away from what they want, but there you go.

I did find it rather odd that Trisquel had switched to using Ubuntu as their
base rather than Debian: it makes wider architecture support a real problem
because Ubuntu has narrowed its own support, presumably dropping non-
lucrative/non-enterprise architectures, meaning that one presumably has to
reactivate other architectures in Ubuntu to propagate and access the necessary
content. I imagine that they also need to do a lot more filtering and
rebuilding on what Ubuntu provides than they would had they stuck with Debian,
but I didn't follow the decisions around them switching from one to the other.

I don't want to get into arguments about popularity, compromises, and so on,
but I have an observation to make. If there were a more conservative base for
Debian, meaning that certain controversial or unwanted content would be
excluded in those base packages, then the derivatives wanting to preserve that
conservatism would have an easier task branching out in their own direction,
and it would probably even help the greater Debian distribution in terms of
managing and maintaining the archive. I think that's what people are looking
for from Debian.

I've looked into various libre distributions (as anyone reading this list
might have noticed), and it is an annoyance that while considering how one
might bootstrap one of the non-Debian-derived libre distributions on other
architectures, Debian has supported such architectures all along. It really
should be a matter of selectively obtaining packages already built by Debian
and no more. Instead, it seems like auditing is still required, and this
appears to be the time-consuming part. That said, I'm still familiarising
myself with things like gNewSense, so I could be wrong, I suppose.

Paul

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-

[Tzafrir Cohen]

Post by Wookey
I've just installed unrar-free,

See also unar as a replacement for unrar-nonfree.
--
Tzafrir Cohen | ***@jabber.org | VIM is
http://tzafrir.org.il | | a Mutt's
***@cohens.org.il | | best
***@debian.org | | friend

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to a

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

Post by J.B. Nicholson
It's entirely possible something has changed and I am not aware of relevant
updates on this (I don't doubt you're in touch with them far more than I
am). Please do reply to the list with updates to this situation.

i'm not - they're extremely limited on resources and time, so i keep
communication to a minimum.

Post by J.B. Nicholson
In https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html we find the following
objection, "Debian also provides a repository of nonfree software.
According to the project, this software is "not part of the Debian system,"
but the repository is hosted on many of the project's main servers, and
people can readily find these nonfree packages by browsing Debian's online
package database and its wiki".

... which is why i proposed an HTTP-redirect-and-rewrite style split
that would appear seamless and transparent (appearing to be a "single
site") for many years. the wiki however would be a problem that would
need careful and comprehensive review... but if steps are never taken,
even small ones, zero progress will ever be made.

l.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-***@files.phco

[GaCuest]

El 15 de octubre de 2016 a las 16:28:55, mdn

Post by mdn
Debian's approach of this isn't really ethical.
Anyone has the freedom of install installing propitiatory software even
non tech users.
Including non-free software in the repository is insisting/proposing
users, especially non tech ones, to give up their freedom for simplicity
without understanding the importance of them and the technical problems
that non free/libre software brings (a good example of that is the game
modding community).
Mainstreams users like you seem to refer to them are what makes software
and hardware go in decadence.
I don't say that they are directly concerned, but it is how their were
treated like, that made them what they are now and ask the same bad
products.
If you continue to give them what they are made of the project will
slowly become like them and only enforce the already bad circle.

I understand you say.

I also prefer libre games, but the quality of these games are usually
low (projects are very small and without money, I understand it and
I'm not criticizing that games).

My idea is similar to the idea of Luke, when you go to download a
proprietary game, you will be warned that it is a proprietary game
and its consequences.

In my opinion, the problem of libre software is not the existence of
proprietary software. The problem is that developers barely get
economic benefits doing libre software. Maybe we should think
about how developers can make profits doing libre software.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-***@files.phcom

[mdn]

Post by GaCuest
El 15 de octubre de 2016 a las 16:28:55, mdn

Post by mdn
Debian's approach of this isn't really ethical.
Anyone has the freedom of install installing propitiatory software even
non tech users.
Including non-free software in the repository is insisting/proposing
users, especially non tech ones, to give up their freedom for simplicity
without understanding the importance of them and the technical problems
that non free/libre software brings (a good example of that is the game
modding community).
Mainstreams users like you seem to refer to them are what makes software
and hardware go in decadence.
I don't say that they are directly concerned, but it is how their were
treated like, that made them what they are now and ask the same bad
products.
If you continue to give them what they are made of the project will
slowly become like them and only enforce the already bad circle.

I understand you say.
I also prefer libre games, but the quality of these games are usually
low (projects are very small and without money, I understand it and
I'm not criticizing that games).

without money ?
Why not ask some devs of some project to finance it via your platform ?
Like a crowdfunding ?
Their was freedom sponsor
https://freedomsponsors.org/
I tried to contact some people because someone was proposing cmyk
support for gimp and I wanted to participate for that but I had no response.

Post by GaCuest
My idea is similar to the idea of Luke, when you go to download a
proprietary game, you will be warned that it is a proprietary game
and its consequences.
In my opinion, the problem of libre software is not the existence of
proprietary software. The problem is that developers barely get
economic benefits doing libre software. Maybe we should think
about how developers can make profits doing libre software.

Imo the problem is the monopoly of Enormous entities like EA and more.
These entities are the reasons why devs anc content creators don't have
more economical benefits instead of the people who worked on it it goes
to the investors.


Their is a solution to that and you can make libre software at the same
time.
I don't remember who said that but this (maybe someone at red-hat IDR)
is what comes in my mind when you want to pay for free software.
"You don't sell free software, you work around it"

This is a very interesting idea, instead of paying once a game you could
make a small monthly payment to have the services (bug correction, more
features etc..) , of course you need to have a lot of
participant/customers in that.

Another one witch is also a compromise that I come up with.
Is that since all video games are ephemera (1 or 2 years) what you can
do is to sell the content of it and releases the software/sources under
free/libre licence and when you have made/reached the estimate amount of
money or more you can release under copyleft the content of the game
(art etc...).

To my knowledge the last propitiatory game engine that was released
under GPL in 2016 was serious sam (2001)
https://github.com/Croteam-official/Serious-Engine

Witch is one of the very rare games who's licence changed to copyleft.
It is sad to see such old software to be released just now and their are
even older software that where never released and even lost.

For example the source code of "homeworld cataclysm" has been lost that
is why their was no remake of it a few months ago.

The lifetime of a game also depends of the community, just look at the
fallout community witch I participated myself a long time ago, mods are
still made on that.
The tools to correct bugs are not the best, it isn't really correction,
but they managed to do it.

For example this mod witch is a obligation to play fallout 3 without
much trouble:
http://www.nexusmods.com/fallout3/mods/19122/?
The number of corrections is just ludicrous.

Do you think this is normal that Bethesda didn't made all these corrections?
Can you imagine if the modding community legally had the sources code,
correct tools and could legally make changes ?

A living example of that is Open Morrowind the full-featured
reimplementation of the Morrowind engine.
https://openmw.org/faq/#do_i_need_morrowind

I have been part of the gaming community since 2003, I have stopped two
years ago to concentrate my objectives on my migration on free/libre
software.

I discovered the power of a community twice.
First when I discovered free/libre software.
The second is re-discovery of the real potential of the modding
community in games.

Post by GaCuest
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

[ryan]

Post by mdn
Another one witch is also a compromise that I come up with.
Is that since all video games are ephemera (1 or 2 years) what you can
do is to sell the content of it and releases the software/sources under
free/libre licence and when you have made/reached the estimate amount of
money or more you can release under copyleft the content of the game
(art etc...).

I had a similar idea, where written into the liscense for the game is a
"self-destruct" feature. Basically X number of years after initial
release the game code goes GPL and the assets CC (possibily GPL
depending on how the copyright law works with re-using the assets in
later games, especially where voice actors and celebrety cameos are
concerned)

I can't help but think of Microsoft Train Simulator as a great example
of why this should exist. It's a codebase old enough that it doesn't
work well on modern systems, there's still a community interested in
playing it, and Microsoft isn't doing anything with it. It's not
available anywhere except for original retail copies getting resold and
passed around amongst those who are actually interested in some old
railroad simulator. If that game got GPL'ed Microsoft wouldn't miss out
on a dime, but they won't bother doing so because "nobody's interested
in that old thing," and they're Microsoft.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

Post by mdn
Another one witch is also a compromise that I come up with.
Is that since all video games are ephemera (1 or 2 years) what you can
do is to sell the content of it and releases the software/sources under
free/libre licence and when you have made/reached the estimate amount of
money or more you can release under copyleft the content of the game
(art etc...).

this happened with descent and descent 2. the first 3d game ever to
have 6 degrees of freedom. you can look it up (on sourceforge i
believe) and compile it up for DOS as well as linux. the data files
are non-free (but still accessible) and there is a community around
the engine creating their own maps.

the really *really* nice thing about descent is that it actually works
well on 320x240 on 16mhz 386s all the way up to modern systems.

l.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attac

[mdn]

Thanks I'll try them out :)

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton

Post by mdn
Another one witch is also a compromise that I come up with.
Is that since all video games are ephemera (1 or 2 years) what you can
do is to sell the content of it and releases the software/sources under
free/libre licence and when you have made/reached the estimate amount of
money or more you can release under copyleft the content of the game
(art etc...).

this happened with descent and descent 2. the first 3d game ever to
have 6 degrees of freedom. you can look it up (on sourceforge i
believe) and compile it up for DOS as well as linux. the data files
are non-free (but still accessible) and there is a community around
the engine creating their own maps.
the really *really* nice thing about descent is that it actually works
well on 320x240 on 16mhz 386s all the way up to modern systems.
l.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

[Eric Duhamel]

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
the really *really* nice thing about descent is that it actually works
well on 320x240 on 16mhz 386s all the way up to modern systems.

I almost find this incredible! Considering games like Doom ran on a few Mhz and NO 3D acceleration, I expect them to run comfortably on modern 1 Ghz computers, but in my experience Freedoom runs slow as a snail on an ARM board. Is there some factor I'm missing? Perhaps the SDL abstraction layer gets in the way of fast direct-architecture code?

I'm tempted to see about compiling that free Descent source and see what you mean. I have the data files in my possession somewhere.

[Eric Duhamel]

AFAIK, Freedoom is just a BSD-licensed IWAD (i.e. game content) that
can be
used instead of the proprietary IWAD with any number of source ports of
the
Doom engine. And since these source ports vary widely in the number of
additional features and capabilities bolted on, it may be a question of
which source port you're using.
I haven't messed with Doom on anything below 1GHz for some years, so I
don't have any specific recommendations for lightweight/efficient
source
ports, but you might try several and see if it makes a difference.

Correct. I don't know why I just said "Freedoom". I've tried Freedoom with Vavoom and something called "Chocolate Doom" and was rather disappointed... maybe I should pick up the search again.

[FaTony]

Maybe try PrBoom? IIRC that's what Rockbox's Doom port is based on, and
that runs on MP3 players with 40 or 50MHz ARM CPUs.

There's Prboom-plus in the official Debian repository.

[Eric Duhamel]

Post by FaTony

Maybe try PrBoom? IIRC that's what Rockbox's Doom port is based on,

and

that runs on MP3 players with 40 or 50MHz ARM CPUs.

There's Prboom-plus in the official Debian repository.

Yeah, there it is. I just ran it smoothly on my Beaglebone Black (1 GHz). I've yet to try PrBoom on my Raspberry Pi B+ (700 MHz), but I'm guessing it will run well on the EOMA68-A20 with it's 1.2 GHz.

[Stefan Monnier]

Post by Eric Duhamel
guessing it will run well on the EOMA68-A20 with it's 1.2 GHz.

Last I checked the A20 only goes up to 960MHz or so:

% cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_frequencies
144000 312000 528000 720000 864000 912000 960000
%

You can try to overclock it, of course.


Stefan


_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netbo

[Eric Duhamel]

Post by Stefan Monnier

Post by Eric Duhamel
guessing it will run well on the EOMA68-A20 with it's 1.2 GHz.

% cat
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_frequencies
144000 312000 528000 720000 864000 912000 960000
%

I must have misunderstood, then. The Crowdsupply page and other pages rate the A20 at 1.2 Ghz

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

look up the cpufreq page on linux-sunxi wiki.

On October 20, 2016 2:19:52 PM PDT, Stefan Monnier

Post by Stefan Monnier

Post by Eric Duhamel
guessing it will run well on the EOMA68-A20 with it's 1.2 GHz.

% cat
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_frequencies
144000 312000 528000 720000 864000 912000 960000
%

I must have misunderstood, then. The Crowdsupply page and other pages rate
the A20 at 1.2 Ghz
--
Eric Duhamel
http://www.noxbanners.net/
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-n

[Eric Duhamel]

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
look up the cpufreq page on linux-sunxi wiki.

linux-sunxi wiki says in "overclocking" section that 1.2 Ghz is "rather unrealistic". Well, I'll move forward assuming the A20 card will be about as fast as my Beaglebone Black (~1 Ghz) with double the RAM.

[Isaac David]

Post by Eric Duhamel
linux-sunxi wiki says in "overclocking" section that 1.2 Ghz is
"rather unrealistic". Well, I'll move forward assuming the A20 card
will be about as fast as my Beaglebone Black (~1 Ghz) with double the
RAM.

Double the cores, quadruple the RAM.
--
Isaac David
GPG: 38D33EF29A7691134357648733466E12EC7BA943



_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large at

[mdn]

Post by GaCuest
El 15 de octubre de 2016 a las 16:28:55, mdn

Post by mdn
Debian's approach of this isn't really ethical.
Anyone has the freedom of install installing propitiatory software even
non tech users.
Including non-free software in the repository is insisting/proposing
users, especially non tech ones, to give up their freedom for simplicity
without understanding the importance of them and the technical problems
that non free/libre software brings (a good example of that is the game
modding community).
Mainstreams users like you seem to refer to them are what makes software
and hardware go in decadence.
I don't say that they are directly concerned, but it is how their were
treated like, that made them what they are now and ask the same bad
products.
If you continue to give them what they are made of the project will
slowly become like them and only enforce the already bad circle.

I understand you say.
I also prefer libre games, but the quality of these games are usually
low (projects are very small and without money, I understand it and
I'm not criticizing that games).

Did you try 0ad ? minetest ? free orion ? free civ ?
I admit that sometimes the interfaces isn't intuitive but dam some of
them are nice.

Post by GaCuest
My idea is similar to the idea of Luke, when you go to download a
proprietary game, you will be warned that it is a proprietary game
and its consequences.
In my opinion, the problem of libre software is not the existence of
proprietary software. The problem is that developers barely get
economic benefits doing libre software. Maybe we should think
about how developers can make profits doing libre software.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

[Eric Duhamel]

A game console based on emulators and ports can be really interesting even
before adding non-free software.

For starters, you may be able to find public domain or even free software
ROM for most of the emulators, and they could even be shipped with the
device operating system as part of the free software included! Users
looking for a device to play classic games will of course download what
they want, but that base set of games will be there, pre-installed, free,
and legal. [PD Roms](http://pdroms.de/) [Community Software](
https://archive.org/details/open_source_software)

RetroPie has an interesting project they call [Ports](https://github.com/
retropie/RetroPie-Setup/wiki/Ports). Some of the engines and games they are
porting are free software.

Lastly, it could be really helpful to provide a platform target for free
software games developers. I'd guess that a device that can run/test games
written in [Godot](https://godotengine.org/), , or Pygame would be rather
attractive.

--
Eric Duhamel
http://www.noxbanners.net/

[Eric Duhamel]

A game console based on emulators and ports can be really interesting even before adding non-free software.

For starters, you may be able to find public domain or even free software ROM for most of the emulators, and they could even be shipped with the device operating system as part of the free software included! Users looking for a device to play classic games will of course download what they want, but that base set of games will be there, pre-installed, free, and legal. It would take some searching and verification, but even a handful of free ROM would be good. [PD Roms](http://pdroms.de/) [Community Software]( https://archive.org/details/open_source_software)

RetroPie has an interesting project they call [Ports](https://github.com/retropie/RetroPie-Setup/wiki/Ports). Some of the engines and games they are porting are free software.

Lastly, it could be really helpful to provide a platform target for free software games developers. I'd guess that a device that can run/test games written in [Godot](https://godotengine.org/), [Löve](https://love2d.org/), or [Pygame](http://www.pygame.org/) would be rather attractive.

[Eric Duhamel]

A game console based on emulators and ports can be really interesting even before adding non-free software.

For starters, you may be able to find public domain or even free software ROM for most of the emulators, and they could even be shipped with the device operating system as part of the free software included! Users looking for a device to play classic games will of course download what they want, but that base set of games will be there, pre-installed, free, and legal. It would take some searching and verification, but even a handful of free ROM would be good. [PD Roms](http://pdroms.de/) [Community Software]( https://archive.org/details/open_source_software)

RetroPie has an interesting project they call [Ports](https://github.com/retropie/RetroPie-Setup/wiki/Ports). Some of the engines and games they are porting are free software.

Lastly, it could be really helpful to provide a platform target for free software games developers. I'd guess that a device that can run/test games written in [Godot](https://godotengine.org/), [Löve](https://love2d.org/), or [Pygame](http://www.pygame.org/) would be rather attractive.

[GaCuest]

El 15 de octubre de 2016 a las 20:33:12, Eric Duhamel

Post by Eric Duhamel
A game console based on emulators and ports can be really interesting even before adding
non-free software.
For starters, you may be able to find public domain or even free software ROM for most of
the emulators, and they could even be shipped with the device operating system as part
of the free software included! Users looking for a device to play classic games will of
course download what they want, but that base set of games will be there, pre-installed,
free, and legal. It would take some searching and verification, but even a handful of
free ROM would be good. [PD Roms](http://pdroms.de/) [Community Software]( https://archive.org/details/open_source_software)
RetroPie has an interesting project they call [Ports](https://github.com/retropie/RetroPie-Setup/wiki/Ports).
Some of the engines and games they are porting are free software.
Lastly, it could be really helpful to provide a platform target for free software games
developers. I'd guess that a device that can run/test games written in [Godot](https://godotengine.org/),
[Löve](https://love2d.org/), or [Pygame](http://www.pygame.org/) would be rather
attractive.

Yes, our idea is to support all that. I still keep my GP32 and GP2X,
I'm a fan of retro games and emulators.

As I said above, it may be interesting to launch a EOMA68-A20
completely libre with this type of software. Without proprietary
drivers for the GPU to be completely free.

Thanks for your comments.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-***@fi

[GaCuest]

Hello everyone!

If anyone if interested, I’ve updated the block diagram with new
changes:
Loading Image...

Any suggestions/corrections are appreciated. Thanks!

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-ne

[Joseph Honold]

Post by GaCuest
Hello everyone!
If anyone if interested, I’ve updated the block diagram with new
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Block%20Diagram%20ZEOMA/Block%20Diagram%20Console%202.1.png
Any suggestions/corrections are appreciated. Thanks!

Do you have a chip picked out to provide 5V boost to the EOMA card
yet? The AXP209 does not appear to provide it.

My plan for handheld computer was to use a TI brand LiPo charging IC
and 5V boost. The AXP209 seems like a better idea than the TI charging
solution since it has configurable regulator outputs and lower cost.

Also, I see you are not using SSD2828 for RGB to MIPI conversion
anymore. This week I finished up a preliminary schematic for a SSD2828
testing/breakout board. I briefly started the layout and began to have
second thoughts. It seems like too much work to incorporate it. I'm
now looking for ~4 inch RGB LCD's instead.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachme

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

take a look at the various schematics available for tablet reference
designs etc. etc. you want something like a SY7208 see
http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/TABLET162_20121110.pdf page 7 and make
sure it's providing enough current.

please for goodness sake read the next update when it comes out,
please for god's sake don't go searching on digikey, pick the first
random convenient IC and expect to be able to have what you design
made up in even a small volume at anything approaching a reasonable
cost. it's very very easy to design ultra-expensive products.

take a look at frida's LCDs, we have the advantage of being in touch
directly with marco, the possibility of group buys, etc. etc.
datasheets all here:
http://rhombus-tech.net/suppliers/shenzen/frida_lcd/




l.

Post by Joseph Honold

Post by GaCuest
Hello everyone!
If anyone if interested, I’ve updated the block diagram with new
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Block%20Diagram%20ZEOMA/Block%20Diagram%20Console%202.1.png
Any suggestions/corrections are appreciated. Thanks!

Do you have a chip picked out to provide 5V boost to the EOMA card
yet? The AXP209 does not appear to provide it.
My plan for handheld computer was to use a TI brand LiPo charging IC
and 5V boost. The AXP209 seems like a better idea than the TI charging
solution since it has configurable regulator outputs and lower cost.
Also, I see you are not using SSD2828 for RGB to MIPI conversion
anymore. This week I finished up a preliminary schematic for a SSD2828
testing/breakout board. I briefly started the layout and began to have
second thoughts. It seems like too much work to incorporate it. I'm
now looking for ~4 inch RGB LCD's instead.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attac

[GaCuest]

El 16 de octubre de 2016 a las 9:16:56, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
take a look at the various schematics available for tablet reference
designs etc. etc. you want something like a SY7208 see
http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/TABLET162_20121110.pdf page 7 and make
sure it's providing enough current.

The link is incorrect. Do you want to say this link?:

http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/kde_tablet/TABLET162_20121110.pdf

I have seen that this is more recent:

http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/kde_tablet/tablet5.pdf

What you recommend me?

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
please for goodness sake read the next update when it comes out,
please for god's sake don't go searching on digikey, pick the first
random convenient IC and expect to be able to have what you design
made up in even a small volume at anything approaching a reasonable
cost. it's very very easy to design ultra-expensive products.
take a look at frida's LCDs, we have the advantage of being in touch
directly with marco, the possibility of group buys, etc. etc.
http://rhombus-tech.net/suppliers/shenzen/frida_lcd/

I think that most components are in large quantities in China:

- Linear potentiometer (trigger) and joystick -- Favor Union/Polyshine
(a Hong Kong company). MOQ is higher, but price is very good.
- TFT + RTP -- Frida.
- Battery -- Kamcy (a Chinese company). A lot of chinese companies
sells this battery.
- EEPROM -- The same that you use on laptop/tablet.
- STM32F072 -- The same that you use on laptop.
- Audio IC -- The same that you use on laptop.
- TS4408A button -- a lot of stores sell its in Aliexpress/Alibaba with
good prices: https://aliexpress.com/af/4mmx4mmx0.8mm.html
- SKRTLAE010 button -- you use it on laptop. Have you found a
chinese replacement?
- USB 2.0 -- you use it on laptop. Have you found a chinese
replacement?
- PMIC -- you use it on tablet.
- MicroUSB, microSD and Audio Jack -- you use it on laptop (Runde).
- XPT2046 -- a clone of ADS7843. A lot of chinese stores sell it on
Aliexpress/Alibaba.

What do you change?

Thanks!

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

Post by GaCuest
El 16 de octubre de 2016 a las 9:16:56, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
take a look at the various schematics available for tablet reference
designs etc. etc. you want something like a SY7208 see
http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/TABLET162_20121110.pdf page 7 and make
sure it's providing enough current.

http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/kde_tablet/TABLET162_20121110.pdf

page 7. contains relevant step-up to 5V converter IC.

Post by GaCuest
- Linear potentiometer (trigger) and joystick -- Favor Union/Polyshine
(a Hong Kong company). MOQ is higher, but price is very good.

let me put the photos in front of runde i know they have something

Post by GaCuest
- TS4408A button -- a lot of stores sell its in Aliexpress/Alibaba with
good prices: https://aliexpress.com/af/4mmx4mmx0.8mm.html

send me some photos (compressed-archive) by direct email message.
i'll put them in front of runde when i visit them

Post by GaCuest
- SKRTLAE010 button -- you use it on laptop. Have you found a
chinese replacement?

runde. again.

Post by GaCuest
- USB 2.0 -- you use it on laptop. Have you found a chinese
replacement?

yes. runde. again. they have practically everything

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-***@file

[GaCuest]

El 17 de octubre de 2016 a las 14:17:16, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton

Post by GaCuest
El 16 de octubre de 2016 a las 9:16:56, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
take a look at the various schematics available for tablet reference
designs etc. etc. you want something like a SY7208 see
http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/TABLET162_20121110.pdf page 7 and make
sure it's providing enough current.

http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/kde_tablet/TABLET162_20121110.pdf

page 7. contains relevant step-up to 5V converter IC.

Yes, but in that document you use RT9266PE.

In this document (page 3):
http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/kde_tablet/tablet5.pdf
you use SY7208B. What is your recommendation?

Thanks.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
take a look at frida's LCDs, we have the advantage of being in touch
directly with marco, the possibility of group buys, etc. etc.
http://rhombus-tech.net/suppliers/shenzen/frida_lcd/

joseph update page i found the NT35510 datasheet it looks like it can
do SPI (am checking with marco) which makes it perfect for the
hybrid-phone i want to do, if you use this one as well FRD39751040V
then we can do a group buy between the three projects. it's 800x480
and it's IPS.

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton

Post by Joseph Honold
Also, I see you are not using SSD2828 for RGB to MIPI conversion
anymore. This week I finished up a preliminary schematic for a SSD2828
testing/breakout board. I briefly started the layout and began to have
second thoughts. It seems like too much work to incorporate it. I'm
now looking for ~4 inch RGB LCD's instead.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to

[Joseph Honold]

I've been looking on aliexpress and found some 3.97" LCD's based on
the nt35510/nt35512. They are similar to the FRD39751040V but have
different pinouts. Does Frida sell sample/single LCD's anywhere online?

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/IPS-4-0-inch-16M-HD-TFT-LCD-RGB-Screen-with-Adapter-Board-800-480-MCU/32669105821.html

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/IPS-3-97-inch-61PIN-3-SPI-24Bit-TFT-LCD-LCM-Color-Screen-with-touch-panel/1764842496.html

The linux driver you posted appears to be for MIPI/DSI mode so
probably not useful for us. I found this RGB24 initialization driver
for u-boot/nt35510. It could be modified for RGB18, then I assume we
could just use the sunxi-fb lcd linux driver?

http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2013-August/161006.html

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
take a look at frida's LCDs, we have the advantage of being in touch
directly with marco, the possibility of group buys, etc. etc.
http://rhombus-tech.net/suppliers/shenzen/frida_lcd/

joseph update page i found the NT35510 datasheet it looks like it can
do SPI (am checking with marco) which makes it perfect for the
hybrid-phone i want to do, if you use this one as well FRD39751040V
then we can do a group buy between the three projects. it's 800x480
and it's IPS.

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton

Post by Joseph Honold
Also, I see you are not using SSD2828 for RGB to MIPI conversion
anymore. This week I finished up a preliminary schematic for a SSD2828
testing/breakout board. I briefly started the layout and began to have
second thoughts. It seems like too much work to incorporate it. I'm
now looking for ~4 inch RGB LCD's instead.

_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm

[Hrvoje Lasic]

Hello,

Just one piece of advise.

Look on TAOBAO as well. Site is completely in Chinese but it is much more
relevant for sourcing electronic parts in China if you know little bit
around. For example you can register on some of Taobao agents (like
www.bhiner.com), you can copy/paste link from Taobao (and Aliexpress) and
you will be able to see complete translation (fair one at least) as well
they will be able to send goods to you for a small fee. Of course, long
term it is the best to have direct access to factory or some help in China,
however being able to buy on Taobao can be helpful.

Hrvoje

Post by Joseph Honold
I've been looking on aliexpress and found some 3.97" LCD's based on
the nt35510/nt35512. They are similar to the FRD39751040V but have
different pinouts. Does Frida sell sample/single LCD's anywhere online?
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/IPS-4-0-inch-16M-HD-TFT-
LCD-RGB-Screen-with-Adapter-Board-800-480-MCU/32669105821.html
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/IPS-3-97-inch-61PIN-3-
SPI-24Bit-TFT-LCD-LCM-Color-Screen-with-touch-panel/1764842496.html
The linux driver you posted appears to be for MIPI/DSI mode so
probably not useful for us. I found this RGB24 initialization driver
for u-boot/nt35510. It could be modified for RGB18, then I assume we
could just use the sunxi-fb lcd linux driver?
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2013-August/161006.html

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
take a look at frida's LCDs, we have the advantage of being in touch
directly with marco, the possibility of group buys, etc. etc.
http://rhombus-tech.net/suppliers/shenzen/frida_lcd/

joseph update page i found the NT35510 datasheet it looks like it can
do SPI (am checking with marco) which makes it perfect for the
hybrid-phone i want to do, if you use this one as well FRD39751040V
then we can do a group buy between the three projects. it's 800x480
and it's IPS.

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton

Post by Joseph Honold
Also, I see you are not using SSD2828 for RGB to MIPI conversion
anymore. This week I finished up a preliminary schematic for a SSD2828
testing/breakout board. I briefly started the layout and began to have
second thoughts. It seems like too much work to incorporate it. I'm
now looking for ~4 inch RGB LCD's instead.

_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

Post by Joseph Honold
I've been looking on aliexpress and found some 3.97" LCD's based on
the nt35510/nt35512. They are similar to the FRD39751040V but have
different pinouts. Does Frida sell sample/single LCD's anywhere online?

yes, but they have to make them by hand (if they're not part of an
existing production run right at the time you ask) so give them a
couple of weeks.

Post by Joseph Honold
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/IPS-4-0-inch-16M-HD-TFT-LCD-RGB-Screen-with-Adapter-Board-800-480-MCU/32669105821.html
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/IPS-3-97-inch-61PIN-3-SPI-24Bit-TFT-LCD-LCM-Color-Screen-with-touch-panel/1764842496.html
The linux driver you posted appears to be for MIPI/DSI mode so
probably not useful for us. I found this RGB24 initialization driver
for u-boot/nt35510. It could be modified for RGB18, then I assume we
could just use the sunxi-fb lcd linux driver?
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2013-August/161006.html

added.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netbook

[GaCuest]

El 18 de octubre de 2016 a las 16:34:37, Joseph Honold

Post by Joseph Honold
I've been looking on aliexpress and found some 3.97" LCD's based on
the nt35510/nt35512. They are similar to the FRD39751040V but have
different pinouts. Does Frida sell sample/single LCD's anywhere online?
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/IPS-4-0-inch-16M-HD-TFT-LCD-RGB-Screen-with-Adapter-Board-800-480-MCU/32669105821.html
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/IPS-3-97-inch-61PIN-3-SPI-24Bit-TFT-LCD-LCM-Color-Screen-with-touch-panel/1764842496.html
The linux driver you posted appears to be for MIPI/DSI mode so
probably not useful for us. I found this RGB24 initialization driver
for u-boot/nt35510. It could be modified for RGB18, then I assume we
could just use the sunxi-fb lcd linux driver?
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2013-August/161006.html

Maybe you can also use the 4.5” 480x854 IPS LCD that we want to use.

I sent it to Luke, but I don’t know if he can use it.

The price is very similar to FRD39751040V. $8 without touch panel, and
$9.5 with RTP. The problem is that this LCD hasn't entered into mass
production now (now Frida only send samples), and we need to buy
5000 units to enter into mass production.

Here you can see the drawing that Frida sent me:
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Datasheets%20ZEOMA/FRD450C4502-RT/FRD450C4502-RT%e7%bb%93%e6%9e%84%e7%a1%ae%e8%ae%a4%e5%9b%be%e7%ba%b80718-Model.pdf

And here you can send the info that Frida sent me (initial code):
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Datasheets%20ZEOMA/FRD450C4502-RT/IVO450_IPS_C045SWY2-1.rar

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send

[Joseph Honold]

Post by GaCuest
Maybe you can also use the 4.5” 480x854 IPS LCD that we want to use.
I sent it to Luke, but I don’t know if he can use it.
The price is very similar to FRD39751040V. $8 without touch panel, and
$9.5 with RTP. The problem is that this LCD hasn't entered into mass
production now (now Frida only send samples), and we need to buy
5000 units to enter into mass production.
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Datasheets%20ZEOMA/FRD450C4502-RT/FRD450C4502-RT%e7%bb%93%e6%9e%84%e7%a1%ae%e8%ae%a4%e5%9b%be%e7%ba%b80718-Model.pdf
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Datasheets%20ZEOMA/FRD450C4502-RT/IVO450_IPS_C045SWY2-1.rar

Your datasheet is a bit hard to read, but I think it shows size as
100mm x 56.?mm. The FRD39751040V datasheet states 97mm x 57mm. They
both seem quite close in size and I might be able to use the larger. I
have not done a case design yet so I'm not dead set on anything.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to ar

[GaCuest]

El 20 de octubre de 2016 a las 16:34:35, Joseph Honold

Post by Joseph Honold

Post by GaCuest
Maybe you can also use the 4.5” 480x854 IPS LCD that we want to use.
I sent it to Luke, but I don’t know if he can use it.
The price is very similar to FRD39751040V. $8 without touch panel, and
$9.5 with RTP. The problem is that this LCD hasn't entered into mass
production now (now Frida only send samples), and we need to buy
5000 units to enter into mass production.
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Datasheets%20ZEOMA/FRD450C4502-RT/FRD450C4502-RT%e7%bb%93%e6%9e%84%e7%a1%ae%e8%ae%a4%e5%9b%be%e7%ba%b80718-Model.pdf
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Datasheets%20ZEOMA/FRD450C4502-RT/IVO450_IPS_C045SWY2-1.rar

Your datasheet is a bit hard to read, but I think it shows size as
100mm x 56.?mm. The FRD39751040V datasheet states 97mm x 57mm. They
both seem quite close in size and I might be able to use the larger. I
have not done a case design yet so I'm not dead set on anything.

The active area of FRD450 is 55,44mm x 98,64mm. The active area of the
FRD3975 is 51,84mm x 86,40mm. Maybe you have seen something wrong.

Is your project a handheld laptop like OpenPandora/Pyra?

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-***@files.phcom

[Joseph Honold]

Post by GaCuest
The active area of FRD450 is 55,44mm x 98,64mm. The active area of the
FRD3975 is 51,84mm x 86,40mm. Maybe you have seen something wrong.

I was referring to the module size, not viewing area.

Post by GaCuest
Is your project a handheld laptop like OpenPandora/Pyra?

Yes, a handheld computer but not clamshell. My plan is to make
something more like a Blackberry/Peek/Nokia E71. Screen above qwerty
keyboard.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to ar

[GaCuest]

El 20 de octubre de 2016 a las 17:05:03, Joseph Honold

Post by Joseph Honold

Post by GaCuest
The active area of FRD450 is 55,44mm x 98,64mm. The active area of the
FRD3975 is 51,84mm x 86,40mm. Maybe you have seen something wrong.

I was referring to the module size, not viewing area.

Then you have seen bad the FRD450. The size of FRD450 is 60mm x 109mm.
The size of FRD3975 is 57.5mm x 97.20mm.

Good luck with your project!

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-***@files.phc

[GaCuest]

El 16 de octubre de 2016 a las 2:57:51, Joseph Honold

Post by Joseph Honold

Post by GaCuest
Hello everyone!
If anyone if interested, I’ve updated the block diagram with new
http://george.the-petries.co.uk/shared-write-access/eoma/Block%20Diagram%20ZEOMA/Block%20Diagram%20Console%202.1.png
Any suggestions/corrections are appreciated. Thanks!

Do you have a chip picked out to provide 5V boost to the EOMA card
yet? The AXP209 does not appear to provide it.
My plan for handheld computer was to use a TI brand LiPo charging IC
and 5V boost. The AXP209 seems like a better idea than the TI charging
solution since it has configurable regulator outputs and lower cost.

I have little idea about electronics, so I try to use the schematic of the
tablet that Luke was doing.

I have seen this:
http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/kde_tablet/tablet5.pdf

So it seems, he uses SY7208 to provide 5V to EOMA68.

Yes, my choice of AXP209 is cost-effective and the possibility to reuse
the work of Luke.

Post by Joseph Honold
Also, I see you are not using SSD2828 for RGB to MIPI conversion
anymore. This week I finished up a preliminary schematic for a SSD2828
testing/breakout board. I briefly started the layout and began to have
second thoughts. It seems like too much work to incorporate it. I'm
now looking for ~4 inch RGB LCD's instead.

As I mentioned earlier, I have little idea about electronics. If I use
SSD2828, possibly I could never do it.

In addition, FRIDA has given me a good screen (IPS, 4.5inch,
480x854, and RGB 18-bit) with resistive touch panel for a good price
($9.5). Perhaps the problem is that the MOQ is 5000 units, but if I
want to do ZEOMA, that should be the minimum selling amount, as
the costs of injection molds for plastic are also high. Produce ZEOMA
in lower amounts would do that the price was very high (as with Pyra).

Post by Joseph Honold
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-n

[Eric Duhamel]

Post by GaCuest
Yes, our idea is to support all that.

That's great to hear.

Post by GaCuest
As I said above, it may be interesting to launch a EOMA68-A20
completely libre with this type of software. Without proprietary
drivers for the GPU to be completely free.

If the ZEOMA will "just plug it in" and work with an EOMA68-A20 cards on offer, meaning the drivers provided by the OS can run the screen, wi-fi, etc., then I think it is already over half-way done! For instance, I'd just need to install the Xorg Joystick driver or make it automatically launch EmulationStation. EmulationStation can be configured to launch any libre games practicable. I've been experimenting with Zeroinstall for fetching games or versions that are not in repos.

Solarwolf runs well on as low as 1 Ghz processors without any 3D acceleration. Freedink is probably a good candidate, too. I haven't tried many libre games on low-powered hardware so this list needs expansion. Also, games with no built-in joystick support will require extra accommodations.

Of course, someone would need to put in the work to derive a pre-configured gaming ISO from a Debian or Parabola base. This could be sold on eoma68 cards or put on a "specially prepared" SD card to flash eoma cards. If anyone can offer some expertise in this area, please chime in.

P.S. I'd like to thank and welcome GaCuest to this mailing list. I had heard the ubrewit-zeoma project was a little hard to reach. Collaboration between these two communities should be beneficial.

[Stefan Monnier]

Post by mdn
Debian's approach of this isn't really ethical.
Anyone has the freedom of install installing propitiatory software even
non tech users.

FWIW, any distribution which comes with a browser that doesn't do
something like LibreJS suffers from the same problem (or worse): users
will download and run proprietary software without even being aware
of it just by going to their favorite web sites.


Stefan


_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-***@files.phcomp.c

[Eric Duhamel]

Post by Stefan Monnier
FWIW, any distribution which comes with a browser that doesn't do
something like LibreJS suffers from the same problem (or worse): users
will download and run proprietary software without even being aware
of it just by going to their favorite web sites.

This is true, although programs delivered via non-free Javascript are so ubiquitous on the web and the demand for them so high the general practice seems to be just letting the user have this Javascript as it is expected behavior.

I don't think much can be done except trying to push a user toward a js-off experience, but letting them turn it on easily when their website doesn't work. This is far from a comprehensive solution though.

Is this the thread about the handheld device? Talk about getting off-topic! :-P

[Stefan Monnier]

Post by Eric Duhamel

Post by Stefan Monnier
FWIW, any distribution which comes with a browser that doesn't do
something like LibreJS suffers from the same problem (or worse): users
will download and run proprietary software without even being aware
of it just by going to their favorite web sites.

This is true, although programs delivered via non-free Javascript are so
ubiquitous on the web and the demand for them so high the general practice
seems to be just letting the user have this Javascript as it is
expected behavior.

I know. But similarly, most users expect to be able to use their wifi/gpu
card regardless of where the firmware is stored ("in hardware" or "in a blob").

Both are problems w.r.t computer freedom and ethics. But for some
reason, most Free Software advocacy focuses on the "blob" part and turns
a blind eye to the JS part.


Stefan


_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachm

[mdn]

This is indeed a problem a problem but I think it's because most
inexperienced users (lambda users in french (sorry I don't know the work
for that in english) have the habit that "it's just works".

This is one of the biggest problems that we face, normal users.
I think that most people were forced to use computers and that is part
of why they don't want to change and they just want it to work without
thinking.

This is a pedagogical problem and like said before I am working on that
subject to create new approaches to make users understand, to build
bridges so that they can choose without mindlessly clicking next.

Post by Stefan Monnier

Post by Eric Duhamel

Post by Stefan Monnier
FWIW, any distribution which comes with a browser that doesn't do
something like LibreJS suffers from the same problem (or worse): users
will download and run proprietary software without even being aware
of it just by going to their favorite web sites.

This is true, although programs delivered via non-free Javascript are so
ubiquitous on the web and the demand for them so high the general practice
seems to be just letting the user have this Javascript as it is
expected behavior.

I know. But similarly, most users expect to be able to use their wifi/gpu
card regardless of where the firmware is stored ("in hardware" or "in a blob").
Both are problems w.r.t computer freedom and ethics. But for some
reason, most Free Software advocacy focuses on the "blob" part and turns
a blind eye to the JS part.
Stefan
_______________________________________________
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

Post by Stefan Monnier
Both are problems w.r.t computer freedom and ethics. But for some
reason, most Free Software advocacy focuses on the "blob" part and turns
a blind eye to the JS part.

the FSF doesn't... FSF-Certified OSes afaiui require LibreJS to be
running as well as privacy-violating default search engines to be
removed. duckduckgo i've seen available as the default in Parabola
browsers for example.

l.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
S

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

Post by FaTony
What kind of games are you planning to run?
Because this is very libre focused project

it's an *ethically* focussed project of which it so happens, by way
of the four freedoms being designed around the extremely rare and
hard-to-understand *joint* combination of software development *and*
ethical considerations, that libre software is a huge part *of* the
project but it is not *the* focus of the project.

now, if people want to *ignore* those ethical considerations they are
entirely free to do so and to experience the consequences of doing so
(which, if they piss on anything that is part of this project,
interfering with it or bringing it into disrepute in any way, then to
say that those consequences would be bad for them would be a massive
understatement).

Post by FaTony
so I assume emulators of
proprietary hardware and proprietary games for that hardware out of the
question.

they're not [out of the question]. they will not be able to receive
an RYF Certificate, that's for sure, but that's nothing to do with
EOMA68.

if you recall a couple weeks ago i began writing up the specification
to incorporate the circumstances under which proprietary software is
acceptable, as well as outlining the [rather large] burden of
responsibility that proprietary software vendors will be taking on as
a result.

if that proprietary software is installable by the end-user (over the
internet) *after* the product ships, that burden is greatly reduced.
if there isn't *any* choice *other* than proprietary software however,
such that that proprietary software might as well already be on the
device, i might however get a bit unhappy about that.

it's still all forming, basically, but the fundamental underlying
rule is: ethical considerations FIRST. stop causing people pain and
distress just because they're buying technology devices.

l.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-***@files.phcomp

[GaCuest]

Post by FaTony
What kind of games are you planning to run?
Because this is very libre focused project so I assume emulators of
proprietary hardware and proprietary games for that hardware out of the
question.

My idea is to offer a completely libre console that anyone can improve
it and anyone can do whatever he wants with it.

My idea is that this freedom allows you to install what you want. For
example, if you want, you can install a completely libre OS (like Parabola
OS) or you can install a proprietary OS (like Windows, if there is a
EOMA68 compatible in the future).

On the other hand, my idea is to focus on a EOMA68-A20 with
GNU/Linux OS (Debian perhaps?). Would be sent without any proprietary
software. When you turn on it (first time), the OS will ask if you want to
download the proprietary drivers for the GPU and if you want to activate
the repository with proprietary software (such as proprietary games or
emulators).

I would also like to offer a EOMA68-A20 card with Parabola OS and other
with Android OS. While we may not provide support for these cards
(for lack of money and time).

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments t