4 ms·

I hope they get there soon. ARM SoCs have a bad habit of running only heavily hacked, out-of-tree, unmaintained kernels abandoned so long ago (or inexplicably t

by csirac2 12y ago

I hope they get there soon. ARM SoCs have a bad habit of running only heavily hacked, out-of-tree, unmaintained kernels abandoned so long ago (or inexplicably they launch with an already 2-year-old kernel) that they'll never boot systemd. Yet even the weakest/slowest of Intel's Bay Trail lineup still uses at least 80% more power than the ideal candidate ARM solution I'm evaluating.

hobolord 12y ago
what is the ideal ARM solution that you're comparing with?
- csirac2 12y ago
  It's based around Cortex A9. Admittedly the modules presented with bay trail had a few features the ARM solution didn't, so it wasn't apples-to-apples.
papaf 12y ago
This is not always true. Arch support for ARM SoCs is good and you get a shiny new kernel with systemd everywhere: http://archlinuxarm.org/ http://archlinuxarm.org/
- thoughtpolice 12y ago
  Do you really get a modern kernel on the Samsung Chromebook (v1)? Last time I tried, Arch still stuck with their hardwired 3.4 kernel, IIRC.
- csirac2 12y ago
  I'm not talking about linux distributions. Arch can only boot whatever kernel happens to be available for a particular SoC just like all the other distros. Here are some TI chips, they're still pushing kernel 2.6 for some processor families: http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/Sitara_Linux_SDK_Supported_Platforms_and_Versions http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/Sitara_Linux_SDK_Sup...