Re: cheap armhf hardware
+++ Tim Small [2011-02-16 11:17 +0000]:
> On 16/02/11 10:32, Wookey wrote:
> armhf needs v7, thumb2, VFP3
> Ah OK. My reading of http://wiki.debian.org/ArmHardFloatPort#
> PartialreferenceofSoCandsupportedISAs seemed to imply that VFP2 was
> sufficient, as this was in the list:
> Freescale iMX3x armv6 VFPv2 none ARM11
So it is.
> ... should this be removed, or is it just a minimum spec that was considered at
> one point?
I'm not sure how it got there, but it's not right anymore. I've
The question remains of whether it is worth maintaining something
between v4t, softfp and v7, thumb2, vfp3, to better support things
like v6, VFP2. Someone would need to show that there was demand, and
sufficient speed improvements over existing armel.
I'm generally of the opinion that work to make it easier to rebuild Debian
for an optimised variant, and to have partial archives for optimised
packages is more generally useful than more full ports.
> I've just summarised the "Minimum CPU & FPU" section at the top of the wiki
Yes. The page probably needs a bit more general revision to be
explicit about what options have actually been chosen, as opposed to
which were available for consideration at the time it was written.
Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM