Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 26 replies
  • Subscribers 59 subscribers
  • Views 2867 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

Angstrom

Former Member

Interesting discussion over on the beagleboard google group https://groups.google.com/forum/#!category-topic/beagleboard/kz3M-It3U5Y

 

Reading between the lines, you get the impression that angstrom was a one man show and that the CircuitCo employee who was that one man has now left for another company.

Exactly what that means for any boards currently using angstrom is as yet unclear.

 

However, if true that angstrom was effectively one person it may explain a lot of the issues people here have seen with it.  Unfortunately the risk is that if angstrom ends up effectively unmaintained, any boards using it as the default pre-installed distro could well get stuck in a dead-end.

 

The beagleboard folks have so far steadfastly stuck with angstrom in spite of the obvious problems, I think it'll be interesting to see what happens next.

Parents

  • Probably about as close as an official response you're likely to get from Jason in this thread:

    https://groups.google.com/forum/#!category-topic/beagleboard/GK8Chte-4Xs

     

    I don't think there's any huge surprise that his requirements seem to come down to bonescript, capemgr and dtbo's for known capes on top of <insert OS here>.

    What I find interesting is that they're prepared to discuss a move, have sensible requirements before doing so, and have obviously been doing some work around getting a version of Debian to that point already. I'd not seen anything suggesting it would even be open for discussion previously.

  • in reply to Former Member

    selsinork wrote:

     

    Probably about as close as an official response you're likely to get from Jason in this thread:

    https://groups.google.com/forum/#!category-topic/beagleboard/GK8Chte-4Xs

     

    I don't think there's any huge surprise that his requirements seem to come down to bonescript, capemgr and dtbo's for known capes on top of <insert OS here>.

    What I find interesting is that they're prepared to discuss a move, have sensible requirements before doing so, and have obviously been doing some work around getting a version of Debian to that point already. I'd not seen anything suggesting it would even be open for discussion previously.

    That's good news on Debian.  I'll be looking forward to it -- I wonder if it can run decently on a 128MB BeagleBoard B4?

  • in reply to johnbeetem

    John Beetem wrote:

     

    I wonder if it can run decently on a 128MB BeagleBoard B4?

    I wouldn't like to guess.  In the end, base requirements will continue to rise, pushed ever upwards by x86 systems that will reasonably have terabyte drives and 8-16Gb ram. Trying to push an OS designed with easy availability of resources onto an Arm board that more closely resembles where x86 was a decade or more ago can't be the easiest of things to do.

    I'm not convinced Debian is the best choice for an embedded board, but then I don't really have a better idea. Debian does have the advantage of having a much bigger pool of active developers than we could hope for on a beagle* only distro. 

Reply
  • in reply to johnbeetem

    John Beetem wrote:

     

    I wonder if it can run decently on a 128MB BeagleBoard B4?

    I wouldn't like to guess.  In the end, base requirements will continue to rise, pushed ever upwards by x86 systems that will reasonably have terabyte drives and 8-16Gb ram. Trying to push an OS designed with easy availability of resources onto an Arm board that more closely resembles where x86 was a decade or more ago can't be the easiest of things to do.

    I'm not convinced Debian is the best choice for an embedded board, but then I don't really have a better idea. Debian does have the advantage of having a much bigger pool of active developers than we could hope for on a beagle* only distro. 

Children
No Data