From: Bouwens / M. <bou...@bl...> - 2004-09-07 06:14:21
|
Hi David, I don't have a JTAG device so just a question. For which board is you patched u-boot binary? I have a new mmc card which is not recognozed by u-boot 1.1.1 So your work might be very helpfull. It just depends on the gumstix youre using. Below the command to update the u-boot partion of the flash. (copied from a previous mail) Regards Robert copy Uboot.bin to MMC power up gumstix with MMC installed and get to Uboot prompt. initialize MMC (mmcinit) load Uboot image into RAM @ a2000000 (fatload mmc 1 a2000000 uboot.bin) unprotect sector 0 of flash (protect off 0) erase sector 0 of flash: (era 1:0) copy image from RAM to flash (cp.b a2000000 0 $(filesize)) protect sector 0 (protect on 0) reboot -----Original Message----- From: gum...@li... [mailto:gum...@li...]On Behalf Of David Farrell Sent: Dienstag, 7. September 2004 05:29 To: gumstix Subject: [Gumstix-users] Secure Digital Enabled u-boot Craig, Attached is a u-boot binary which contains support for Secure Digital and MMC memory cards. This image corrects several errors with the origional plus adds SD. mmcinit now 100% 1st time all MMC cards I have, please test more.. card size is read and passed to fat fs no 32MB fake partition table detected and 1st active passed to fat fs (not tested) boot sector read to determine 1st actual sector. Linux 2.6.9 seems to init the mmc card on its own, so most of the above is useless for linux. Next I will try to patch the kernel driver. How do I diff against the repository? I would rather send you the diff that the sources. David. |
From: David F. <dav...@ya...> - 2004-09-07 15:09:04
|
Robert, I am using the new board. I have 200MHZ with bluetooth but I am running it at 400MHZ (I don't advise anyone to do this). So the code is for 400MHZ. To safely try it use u-boot to load it to ram. GUM>loadb 0xa2000000 (use hypertermial to send it using kermit) When the uplaod completes: GUM>go 0xa2000000 This will run the new u-boot without changing the existing u-boot in flash. Now insert you MMC/SD card and type "mmcinit" Let me know what is says when it reports card info. Linux may not work for you MMC yet. David. Bouwens / Mehl <bou...@bl...> wrote: Hi David, I don't have a JTAG device so just a question. For which board is you patched u-boot binary? I have a new mmc card which is not recognozed by u-boot 1.1.1 So your work might be very helpfull. It just depends on the gumstix youre using. Below the command to update the u-boot partion of the flash. (copied from a previous mail) Regards Robert copy Uboot.bin to MMC power up gumstix with MMC installed and get to Uboot prompt. initialize MMC (mmcinit) load Uboot image into RAM @ a2000000 (fatload mmc 1 a2000000 uboot.bin) unprotect sector 0 of flash (protect off 0) erase sector 0 of flash: (era 1:0) copy image from RAM to flash (cp.b a2000000 0 $(filesize)) protect sector 0 (protect on 0) reboot -----Original Message----- From: gum...@li... [mailto:gum...@li...]On Behalf Of David Farrell Sent: Dienstag, 7. September 2004 05:29 To: gumstix Subject: [Gumstix-users] Secure Digital Enabled u-boot Craig, Attached is a u-boot binary which contains support for Secure Digital and MMC memory cards. This image corrects several errors with the origional plus adds SD. mmcinit now 100% 1st time all MMC cards I have, please test more.. card size is read and passed to fat fs no 32MB fake partition table detected and 1st active passed to fat fs (not tested) boot sector read to determine 1st actual sector. Linux 2.6.9 seems to init the mmc card on its own, so most of the above is useless for linux. Next I will try to patch the kernel driver. How do I diff against the repository? I would rather send you the diff that the sources. David. |
From: Bouwens / M. <bou...@bl...> - 2004-09-08 20:56:41
|
Hi David, I inserted a sd card ... it simply works. Cut&Paste: GUM> mmcinit *********************************************** * SD found. Card desciption is: * * MID = 19 OID=DY * * Revision = 00.00 * * Product Name = SMISD * * Serial Number = 0000c270 * * Month = 6 Year = 2004 * *********************************************** CSD_STRUCTURE = 0, MMC_PROT=0 TAAC=7f (80000000ns), NSAC=0 TRAN = 32 (25000000bps) CCC=1f5, READ_BL_LEN=9 (512) C_SIZE=f27, C_SIZE_MULT=4 (64) TOTAL SD SIZE=127107072 GUM> Hmm, and what do we do now? Regards Robert -----Original Message----- From: gum...@li... [mailto:gum...@li...]On Behalf Of David Farrell Sent: Dienstag, 7. September 2004 17:09 To: gum...@li... Subject: RE: [Gumstix-users] Secure Digital Enabled u-boot Robert, I am using the new board. I have 200MHZ with bluetooth but I am running it at 400MHZ (I don't advise anyone to do this). So the code is for 400MHZ. To safely try it use u-boot to load it to ram. GUM>loadb 0xa2000000 (use hypertermial to send it using kermit) When the uplaod completes: GUM>go 0xa2000000 This will run the new u-boot without changing the existing u-boot in flash. Now insert you MMC/SD card and type "mmcinit" Let me know what is says when it reports card info. Linux may not work for you MMC yet. David. Bouwens / Mehl <bou...@bl...> wrote: Hi David, I don't have a JTAG device so just a question. For which board is you patched u-boot binary? I have a new mmc card which is not recognozed by u-boot 1.1.1 So your work might be very helpfull. It just depends on the gumstix youre using. Below the command to update the u-boot partion of the flash. (copied from a previous mail) Regards Robert copy Uboot.bin to MMC power up gumstix with MMC installed and get to Uboot prompt. initialize MMC (mmcinit) load Uboot image into RAM @ a2000000 (fatload mmc 1 a2000000 uboot.bin) unprotect sector 0 of flash (protect off 0) erase sector 0 of flash: (era 1:0) copy image from RAM to flash (cp.b a2000000 0 $(filesize)) protect sector 0 (protect on 0) reboot -----Original Message----- From: gum...@li... [mailto:gum...@li...]On Behalf Of David Farrell Sent: Dienstag, 7. September 2004 05:29 To: gumstix Subject: [Gumstix-users] Secure Digital Enabled u-boot Craig, Attached is a u-boot binary which contains support for Secure Digital and MMC memory cards. This image corrects several errors with the origional plus adds SD. mmcinit now 100% 1st time all MMC cards I have, please test more.. card size is read and passed to fat fs no 32MB fake partition table detected and 1st active passed to fat fs (not tested) boot sector read to determine 1st actual sector. Linux 2.6.9 seems to init the mmc card on its own, so most of the above is useless for linux. Next I will try to patch the kernel driver. How do I diff against the repository? I would rather send you the diff that the sources. David. |
From: David F. <dav...@ya...> - 2004-09-08 22:04:57
|
Robert, I thought you had a MMC card that did not work? The SD will not work in linux yet (ever?). David. --- Bouwens / Mehl <bou...@bl...> wrote: > Hi David, > > I inserted a sd card ... it simply works. > Cut&Paste: > GUM> mmcinit > *********************************************** > * SD found. Card desciption is: * > * MID = 19 OID=DY * > * Revision = 00.00 * > * Product Name = SMISD * > * Serial Number = 0000c270 * > * Month = 6 Year = 2004 > * > *********************************************** > CSD_STRUCTURE = 0, MMC_PROT=0 > TAAC=7f (80000000ns), NSAC=0 > TRAN = 32 (25000000bps) > CCC=1f5, READ_BL_LEN=9 (512) > C_SIZE=f27, C_SIZE_MULT=4 (64) > TOTAL SD SIZE=127107072 > GUM> > > Hmm, and what do we do now? > > Regards > Robert > -----Original Message----- > From: > gum...@li... > [mailto:gum...@li...]On > Behalf Of David Farrell > Sent: Dienstag, 7. September 2004 17:09 > To: gum...@li... > Subject: RE: [Gumstix-users] Secure Digital > Enabled u-boot > > > Robert, > I am using the new board. I have 200MHZ with > bluetooth but I am running > it at 400MHZ (I don't advise anyone to do > this). So the code is for > 400MHZ. > > To safely try it use u-boot to load it to > ram. > > GUM>loadb 0xa2000000 > (use hypertermial to send it using kermit) > > When the uplaod completes: > GUM>go 0xa2000000 > > This will run the new u-boot without changing > the existing u-boot in > flash. > Now insert you MMC/SD card and type "mmcinit" > Let me know what is says when it reports card > info. > > Linux may not work for you MMC yet. > > David. > > > > > > Bouwens / Mehl <bou...@bl...> > wrote: > Hi David, > > I don't have a JTAG device so just a > question. > For which board is you patched u-boot > binary? > > I have a new mmc card which is not > recognozed by u-boot 1.1.1 > So your work might be very helpfull. > It just depends on the gumstix youre using. > Below the command to update the u-boot > partion of the flash. > (copied from a previous mail) > Regards > > Robert > > copy Uboot.bin to MMC > > power up gumstix with MMC installed and get > to Uboot prompt. > > initialize MMC (mmcinit) > > load Uboot image into RAM @ a2000000 > (fatload mmc 1 a2000000 uboot.bin) > > unprotect sector 0 of flash (protect off 0) > > erase sector 0 of flash: (era 1:0) > > copy image from RAM to flash (cp.b a2000000 > 0 $(filesize)) > > protect sector 0 (protect on 0) > > reboot > > -----Original Message----- > From: > gum...@li... > [mailto:gum...@li...]On > Behalf Of David Farrell > Sent: Dienstag, 7. September 2004 05:29 > To: gumstix > Subject: [Gumstix-users] Secure Digital > Enabled u-boot > > > Craig, > Attached is a u-boot binary which > contains support for Secure Digital > and MMC memory cards. This image > corrects several errors with the > origional plus adds SD. > > mmcinit now 100% 1st time all MMC cards I > have, please test more.. > card size is read and passed to fat fs no > 32MB fake > partition table detected and 1st active > passed to fat fs (not tested) > boot sector read to determine 1st actual > sector. > > Linux 2.6.9 seems to init the mmc card on > its own, so most of the > above is useless for linux. Next I will > try to patch the kernel > driver. > > How do I diff against the repository? I > would rather send you the > diff > that the sources. > > David. > |
From: <bou...@bl...> - 2004-09-09 06:22:25
|
Hi David, >I thought you had a MMC card that did not work? It is a SD/MMC card. The spec says clearly backwards compatible. That's the reason I bought it. I can access the card using my linux box. >The SD will not work in linux yet (ever?). Yes, that's for shure. If someone gets access to the source of the driver it is no longer secure because you 'see' how the secure protection works. I tried to use: protect off 0 As stated in various mails, but the syntax is somehow wrong. u-boot complains. Can you give me the exakt syntax? Regards Robert > >David. > >--- Bouwens / Mehl <bou...@bl...> >wrote: > >> Hi David, >> >> I inserted a sd card ... it simply works. >> Cut&Paste: >> GUM> mmcinit >> *********************************************** >> * SD found. Card desciption is: * >> * MID = 19 OID=DY * >> * Revision = 00.00 * >> * Product Name = SMISD * >> * Serial Number = 0000c270 * >> * Month = 6 Year = 2004 >> * >> *********************************************** >> CSD_STRUCTURE = 0, MMC_PROT=0 >> TAAC=7f (80000000ns), NSAC=0 >> TRAN = 32 (25000000bps) >> CCC=1f5, READ_BL_LEN=9 (512) >> C_SIZE=f27, C_SIZE_MULT=4 (64) >> TOTAL SD SIZE=127107072 >> GUM> >> >> Hmm, and what do we do now? >> >> Regards >> Robert >> -----Original Message----- >> From: >> gum...@li... >> >[mailto:gum...@li...]On >> Behalf Of David Farrell >> Sent: Dienstag, 7. September 2004 17:09 >> To: gum...@li... >> Subject: RE: [Gumstix-users] Secure Digital >> Enabled u-boot >> >> >> Robert, >> I am using the new board. I have 200MHZ with >> bluetooth but I am running >> it at 400MHZ (I don't advise anyone to do >> this). So the code is for >> 400MHZ. >> >> To safely try it use u-boot to load it to >> ram. >> >> GUM>loadb 0xa2000000 >> (use hypertermial to send it using kermit) >> >> When the uplaod completes: >> GUM>go 0xa2000000 >> >> This will run the new u-boot without changing >> the existing u-boot in >> flash. >> Now insert you MMC/SD card and type "mmcinit" >> Let me know what is says when it reports card >> info. >> >> Linux may not work for you MMC yet. >> >> David. >> >> >> >> >> >> Bouwens / Mehl <bou...@bl...> >> wrote: >> Hi David, >> >> I don't have a JTAG device so just a >> question. >> For which board is you patched u-boot >> binary? >> >> I have a new mmc card which is not >> recognozed by u-boot 1.1.1 >> So your work might be very helpfull. >> It just depends on the gumstix youre using. >> Below the command to update the u-boot >> partion of the flash. >> (copied from a previous mail) >> Regards >> >> Robert >> >> copy Uboot.bin to MMC >> >> power up gumstix with MMC installed and get >> to Uboot prompt. >> >> initialize MMC (mmcinit) >> >> load Uboot image into RAM @ a2000000 >> (fatload mmc 1 a2000000 uboot.bin) >> >> unprotect sector 0 of flash (protect off 0) >> >> erase sector 0 of flash: (era 1:0) >> >> copy image from RAM to flash (cp.b a2000000 >> 0 $(filesize)) >> >> protect sector 0 (protect on 0) >> >> reboot >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: >> gum...@li... >> >[mailto:gum...@li...]On >> Behalf Of David Farrell >> Sent: Dienstag, 7. September 2004 05:29 >> To: gumstix >> Subject: [Gumstix-users] Secure Digital >> Enabled u-boot >> >> >> Craig, >> Attached is a u-boot binary which >> contains support for Secure Digital >> and MMC memory cards. This image >> corrects several errors with the >> origional plus adds SD. >> >> mmcinit now 100% 1st time all MMC cards I >> have, please test more.. >> card size is read and passed to fat fs no >> 32MB fake >> partition table detected and 1st active >> passed to fat fs (not tested) >> boot sector read to determine 1st actual >> sector. >> >> Linux 2.6.9 seems to init the mmc card on >> its own, so most of the >> above is useless for linux. Next I will >> try to patch the kernel >> driver. >> >> How do I diff against the repository? I >> would rather send you the >> diff >> that the sources. >> >> David. >> > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop >FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools! >Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today. >http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5047&alloc_id=10808&op=click >_______________________________________________ >gumstix-users mailing list >gum...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users |
From: David F. <dav...@ya...> - 2004-09-09 15:29:16
|
Robert, --- bou...@bl... wrote: > Hi David, > > >I thought you had a MMC card that did not > work? > It is a SD/MMC card. The spec says clearly > backwards compatible. > That's the reason I bought it. > I can access the card using my linux box. I can acccess my SD card with fedora, using a USB adapter from SanDisk or Kodak. This is completely different. The firmware is inside the adapter. Linux simple sees a "Mass Storage" USB device. > >The SD will not work in linux yet (ever?). > Yes, that's for shure. If someone gets access > to the source of the driver > it is no longer secure because you 'see' how > the secure protection works. I do not want the secure protection. Think of it as two partitions. The first (99%) of the drive is not secure. The second 1% is secure. All I want is the access the 99%. I wrote a driver to do this. There is some legal question as to if I can release it without being a licensee. > I tried to use: protect off 0 > As stated in various mails, but the syntax is > somehow wrong. u-boot complains. > > Can you give me the exakt syntax? Syntax for what? > Regards > Robert > David. |
From: Bouwens / M. <bou...@bl...> - 2004-09-09 15:55:46
|
Hi David, > > I tried to use: protect off 0 > > As stated in various mails, but the syntax is > > somehow wrong. u-boot complains. > > > > Can you give me the exakt syntax? > > Syntax for what? I try to upload a new u-boot version. Unprotecting the first sector fails because the syntax is wrong. I try the following: loadb 0xa2000000 protect off 0 era 1:0 cp.b a2000000 0 $(filesize) protect on 0 But the second step fails... Regards Robert |
From: David F. <dav...@ya...> - 2004-09-09 16:08:23
|
Robert, Please do not put my version in flash. You can use it to test cards for now. Gumstix has the patch so offical updates are in their hands. For your info: (See the u-boot help) protect off 1:0 ... protect on 1:0 The 1 is the flash chip # and is required. If you do the ... wrong and don't have a jtag adapter, your board will be junk. The safest way to update is to use the new kernel and commands described by craig previously. David. |
From: Jon M. <jm...@rm...> - 2004-09-09 16:00:46
|
David Farrell wrote: >>>The SD will not work in linux yet (ever?). >>> >>> >>Yes, that's for shure. If someone gets access >>to the source of the driver >>it is no longer secure because you 'see' how >>the secure protection works. >> >> > >I do not want the secure protection. Think of it >as two partitions. The first (99%) of the drive >is not secure. The second 1% is secure. All I >want is the access the 99%. I wrote a driver to >do this. There is some legal question as to if I >can release it without being a licensee. > >David. > > > My understanding of the issue is that if you don't agree to the SD Card Association's license, then it cannot apply to you. Doing I/O on a device violates neither copyright nor trademark. And there are two rumors floating around. One is that there are no software patent related parts to SD. And the other rumor is that there is a software patent to the "secure" part of SD. The rest of SD is pretty much like MMC with some enhanced I/O, and there are plenty of other buses and serial transports that use the same kind of I/O techniques so it's pretty doubtful that I/O would have special patents. Now advertising that the device supports SD is probably a trademark issue and SD Card Association would require Gumstix, Inc. to become a member to gain the ability to advertise that in an overt way. There are many organizations that protect themselves purely with trademarks. With those organizations you can make something completely identical and compatible and unlicensed, as long as you don't violate the trademarks you're good to go. It would be interesting if we could look up any patent numbers related to SD (and possibly MMC). Also filing a patent requires disclosure, so someone other than people developing the driver should look up the patent to prevent any claims of reverse engineering from being invalidated. (reverse engineering is legal under the right set of circumstances). Also if you do not want to access the secure parts of SD then there is no DMCA issue either. (even though the security on SD is a total joke) disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor do I pretend to be a lawyer. This is not legal advice. This is all from the perspective of US laws, the laws in your country may differ greatly on this issue. -- Jon |
From: David F. <dav...@ya...> - 2004-09-09 16:26:34
|
Jon, I think we are probably in agreement,except for the first sentence. I don't agree with a marriage license but it certainly applies to me. My issue at this point is that I am individual, I have no corporate protection. If gumstix was to assume liability and open source a driver, it is easy to do. For the PXA255 chip, there is really no benefit to the primary feature of SD, the 4-bit interface. The 255 only supports one bit mode. David. --- Jon Mayo <jm...@rm...> wrote: > My understanding of the issue is that if you > don't agree to the SD Card > Association's license, then it cannot apply to > you. Doing I/O on a > device violates neither copyright nor > trademark. And there are two > rumors floating around. One is that there are > no software patent related > parts to SD. And the other rumor is that there > is a software patent to > the "secure" part of SD. The rest of SD is > pretty much like MMC with > some enhanced I/O, and there are plenty of > other buses and serial > transports that use the same kind of I/O > techniques so it's pretty > doubtful that I/O would have special patents. > > Now advertising that the device supports SD is > probably a trademark > issue and SD Card Association would require > Gumstix, Inc. to become a > member to gain the ability to advertise that in > an overt way. There are > many organizations that protect themselves > purely with trademarks. With > those organizations you can make something > completely identical and > compatible and unlicensed, as long as you don't > violate the trademarks > you're good to go. > > It would be interesting if we could look up any > patent numbers related > to SD (and possibly MMC). Also filing a patent > requires disclosure, so > someone other than people developing the driver > should look up the > patent to prevent any claims of reverse > engineering from being > invalidated. (reverse engineering is legal > under the right set of > circumstances). > > Also if you do not want to access the secure > parts of SD then there is > no DMCA issue either. (even though the security > on SD is a total joke) > > disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor do I pretend > to be a lawyer. This is > not legal advice. This is all from the > perspective of US laws, the laws > in your country may differ greatly on this > issue. > -- > Jon |
From: Jon M. <jm...@rm...> - 2004-09-09 17:22:56
|
if you didn't agree to the license how did you get married? you shouldn't sign things you don't agree to. (don't get me started on political rants about the silliness of having to get the government's permission to be married) You might want to contact the EFF for help. They are designed to help individual developers protect themselves from corporations. that stinks about not having the faster transfer modes on the 255. David Farrell wrote: >Jon, > >I think we are probably in agreement,except for >the first sentence. I don't agree with a marriage >license but it certainly applies to me. My issue >at this point is that I am individual, I have no >corporate protection. If gumstix was to assume >liability and open source a driver, it is easy to >do. > >For the PXA255 chip, there is really no benefit >to the primary feature of SD, the 4-bit >interface. The 255 only supports one bit mode. > >David. > >--- Jon Mayo <jm...@rm...> wrote: > > > >>My understanding of the issue is that if you >>don't agree to the SD Card >>Association's license, then it cannot apply to >>you. Doing I/O on a >>device violates neither copyright nor >>trademark. And there are two >>rumors floating around. One is that there are >>no software patent related >>parts to SD. And the other rumor is that there >>is a software patent to >>the "secure" part of SD. The rest of SD is >>pretty much like MMC with >>some enhanced I/O, and there are plenty of >>other buses and serial >>transports that use the same kind of I/O >>techniques so it's pretty >>doubtful that I/O would have special patents. >> >>Now advertising that the device supports SD is >>probably a trademark >>issue and SD Card Association would require >>Gumstix, Inc. to become a >>member to gain the ability to advertise that in >>an overt way. There are >>many organizations that protect themselves >>purely with trademarks. With >>those organizations you can make something >>completely identical and >>compatible and unlicensed, as long as you don't >>violate the trademarks >>you're good to go. >> >>It would be interesting if we could look up any >>patent numbers related >>to SD (and possibly MMC). Also filing a patent >>requires disclosure, so >>someone other than people developing the driver >>should look up the >>patent to prevent any claims of reverse >>engineering from being >>invalidated. (reverse engineering is legal >>under the right set of >>circumstances). >> >>Also if you do not want to access the secure >>parts of SD then there is >>no DMCA issue either. (even though the security >>on SD is a total joke) >> >>disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor do I pretend >>to be a lawyer. This is >>not legal advice. This is all from the >>perspective of US laws, the laws >>in your country may differ greatly on this >>issue. >>-- >>Jon >> >> > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 >Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on >who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. >Deadline: Sept. 13. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php >_______________________________________________ >gumstix-users mailing list >gum...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > > > |
From: David F. <dav...@ya...> - 2004-09-09 18:18:47
|
Jon, --- Jon Mayo <jm...@rm...> wrote: > if you didn't agree to the license how did you > get married? you I am happily married with 5 kids, I guess I traded conviction for something more important. > shouldn't sign things you don't agree to. > (don't get me started on > political rants about the silliness of having > to get the government's > permission to be married) > > You might want to contact the EFF for help. > They are designed to help > individual developers protect themselves from > corporations. I'll look into this. I am a hardware engineer by trade, software development costs me more than I earn from it. > that stinks about not having the faster > transfer modes on the 255. This is true, but small and inexpensive is how we want got here. There are many other options, growing faster by the week. I would like to think the next version of a gumstix will incorporate what we discuss here. David. |
From: Craig H. <cr...@hu...> - 2004-09-09 18:49:26
|
On Sep 9, 2004, at 11:18 AM, David Farrell wrote: >> that stinks about not having the faster >> transfer modes on the 255. > > This is true, but small and inexpensive is how we > want got here. There are many other options, > growing faster by the week. I would like to > think the next version of a gumstix will > incorporate what we discuss here. Our goal is definitely to follow what people think it makes sense for us to develop. Actually, one thing I'm quite excited about is the PXA27x chips which have all the RAM and Flash on the gumstix built into the CPU, in a 17x17mm package instead of the current 18x18mm PXA255 package. Those of you who've looked at a gumstix board, look at how much space is taken up by those RAM chips and the flash chip.... C |
From: Kim H. <ki...@ki...> - 2004-09-09 18:57:05
|
I find that pretty interesting. I like small. One thing that crossed my mind but is probably a real pain in the arse and not an issue for most people is an alternative form factor. i.e. the current gumstix is pretty nifty being long and thin, but for some applications and box sizes the length is an issue. It could be more useful if it were more square, the total package could then possibly be smaller. i.e. my app + the gumstix. But as I said, it's probably more trouble than it's worth to you. - Kim > Our goal is definitely to follow what people think it makes sense for > us to develop. Actually, one thing I'm quite excited about is the > PXA27x chips which have all the RAM and Flash on the gumstix built into > the CPU, in a 17x17mm package instead of the current 18x18mm PXA255 > package. Those of you who've looked at a gumstix board, look at how > much space is taken up by those RAM chips and the flash chip.... |
From: Craig H. <cr...@gu...> - 2004-09-09 20:16:35
|
Actually Kim, if you don't want the waysmall box around the whole thing, it might not be impossible -- Gordon? C On Sep 9, 2004, at 11:56 AM, Kim Hendrikse wrote: > I find that pretty interesting. I like small. > > One thing that crossed my mind but is probably a real pain in the arse > and not an issue for most people is an alternative form factor. i.e. > the > current gumstix is pretty nifty being long and thin, but for some > applications > and box sizes the length is an issue. It could be more useful if it > were > more square, the total package could then possibly be smaller. i.e. my > app + the gumstix. > > But as I said, it's probably more trouble than it's worth to you. > > - Kim > >> Our goal is definitely to follow what people think it makes sense for >> us to develop. Actually, one thing I'm quite excited about is the >> PXA27x chips which have all the RAM and Flash on the gumstix built >> into >> the CPU, in a 17x17mm package instead of the current 18x18mm PXA255 >> package. Those of you who've looked at a gumstix board, look at how >> much space is taken up by those RAM chips and the flash chip.... > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 > Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on > who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. > Deadline: Sept. 13. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users |
From: Kim H. <ki...@ki...> - 2004-09-09 20:25:21
|
> Actually Kim, if you don't want the waysmall box around the whole > thing, it might not be impossible -- Gordon? Well I thought I'd throw the question your way to see what you thought about it. Really just selfishly inspired. In my application, the length was just a little long for the box I wanted to put it in. I had to machine the box a bit. But if it were square I could probably put it into other smaller boxes I think. I imagine that that would double the work for any new addition and require a total rebuild for the first time, but it could be useful to find out what profiles various folks would like. My waysmall broke. Well... the contacts deteriorated to the point where it no longer worked, so I robbed all the components and build a new board anyway :) But having said all this, I'm sure that there are other cute applications that really would benefit from the small skinny profile. - Kim |
From: Craig H. <cr...@hu...> - 2004-09-09 20:37:17
|
The "suggestions" stuff is now on the wiki if you want to suggest this there :) C On Sep 9, 2004, at 1:25 PM, Kim Hendrikse wrote: >> Actually Kim, if you don't want the waysmall box around the whole >> thing, it might not be impossible -- Gordon? > > Well I thought I'd throw the question your way to see what you thought > about > it. Really just selfishly inspired. In my application, the length was > just a > little long for the box I wanted to put it in. I had to machine the > box a bit. > But if it were square I could probably put it into other smaller boxes > I think. > I imagine that that would double the work for any new addition and > require a > total rebuild for the first time, but it could be useful to find out > what > profiles various folks would like. > > My waysmall broke. Well... the contacts deteriorated to the point where > it no longer worked, so I robbed all the components and build a new > board > anyway :) > > But having said all this, I'm sure that there are other cute > applications > that really would benefit from the small skinny profile. |
From: Kim H. <ki...@ki...> - 2004-09-09 20:26:49
|
Has anyone actually got PPP working on the gumstix? I'm almost there. I have the kernel with PPP compiled in. The chat scripts work now, but when it connects I get: Couldn't set tty to PPP discipline: Invalid argument which I think implies somethings not working right with the driver. - Kim |
From: Craig H. <cr...@hu...> - 2004-09-09 20:35:30
|
Ah, you might not have compiled in the serial line discipline stuff in the kernel. I think it's somewhere under the serial port options in menuconfig. C On Sep 9, 2004, at 1:26 PM, Kim Hendrikse wrote: > Has anyone actually got PPP working on the gumstix? I'm almost there. > I have > the kernel with PPP compiled in. The chat scripts work now, but when it > connects I get: > > Couldn't set tty to PPP discipline: Invalid argument > > which I think implies somethings not working right with the driver. |
From: Kim H. <ki...@ki...> - 2004-09-09 20:43:57
|
Yep! That's what I did wrong. It's working now. - Kim > Ah, you might not have compiled in the serial line discipline stuff in > the kernel. I think it's somewhere under the serial port options in > menuconfig. > > C > > On Sep 9, 2004, at 1:26 PM, Kim Hendrikse wrote: > > >Has anyone actually got PPP working on the gumstix? I'm almost there. > >I have > >the kernel with PPP compiled in. The chat scripts work now, but when it > >connects I get: > > > > Couldn't set tty to PPP discipline: Invalid argument > > > >which I think implies somethings not working right with the driver. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 > Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on > who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. > Deadline: Sept. 13. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users |
From: Craig H. <cr...@hu...> - 2004-09-09 18:45:22
|
You don't need the government's permission to get married if you get married overseas. C On Sep 9, 2004, at 10:21 AM, Jon Mayo wrote: > if you didn't agree to the license how did you get married? you > shouldn't sign things you don't agree to. (don't get me started on > political rants about the silliness of having to get the government's > permission to be married) |
From: Lennert B. <bu...@wa...> - 2004-09-09 19:42:48
|
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 11:45:13AM -0700, Craig Hughes wrote: > You don't need the government's permission to get married if you get > married overseas. Hmm, do you need the government's permission at all? As far as I know, over here (Netherlands) you can marry as long as you're not married yet. You can marry either when turning 18, or if you're between 16 and 18 and have your parents' permission. If you marry with a foreigner, you officially have to ask the Immigration office for their 'advice', and they can give a negative advice if there is a suspicion that the marriage is intended solely to give the foreigner a legal status in the Netherlands. But the municipality where you marry (usually the city where you live) is free to ignore that advice, and in practise, they just send off a letter to the Immigration office asking for their advice and then just get you married without even waiting for the reply. It's some time ago that I looked into this -- rules might be different now, and I might mis-recollect some things. --L |
From: Craig H. <cr...@hu...> - 2004-09-09 18:29:27
|
We'll just say that we support =D5=8FD I/O not SD -- god bless Unicode = code=20 point U+054F C On Sep 9, 2004, at 9:00 AM, Jon Mayo wrote: > Now advertising that the device supports SD is probably a trademark=20 > issue and SD Card Association would require Gumstix, Inc. to become a=20= > member to gain the ability to advertise that in an overt way. There=20 > are many organizations that protect themselves purely with trademarks.=20= > With those organizations you can make something completely identical=20= > and compatible and unlicensed, as long as you don't violate the=20 > trademarks you're good to go. |