[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Feedback from the community -> ARM

W dniu 11.06.2021 o 09:25, Ralph Aichinger pisze:

I really think Debian should have a better answer to installing on the Raspberry Pi, as this ist the only board that is widely available, sold in *huge* numbers (40 million?), can boot aarch64, has up to 8GB RAM (which makes it quite usable for many tasks), and most of all a long support times (they guarantee production of the RPi4 until January 2026, which is probably longer than most Intel hardware sold today, and probably four times as long as comparable SBC products.

Ask Raspberry/Pi vendor then. Make them work on getting support for their product into mainline, make use of available standards during design of their next products.

Properly designed Arm board should boot generic ISO written into USB stick (dd if=d-i.iso of=/dev/sda). Several SBC work that way already (or can have their firmware flashed to be that way).

Distributions should not waste time on getting SBC systems working but SBC vendors should make them 'just work' with distributions.

You go to store, buy x86-64 laptop/computer and expect it to just work with Debian. Arm hardware should work same way. Just vendors do not care because users are so used to 'shit, this arm device needs some special treatment' way of support.

How much different is the process of booting an RPi 4 with UEFi from e.g. booting some run of the mill notebook with obscure Realtek components that need binary blobs too?

'of the mill notebook': connect cables, plug USB stick with generic installer, boot, install, use. Then use the same USB stick with another notebook from different vendor.

RPi4: find out how it boots, prepare SD card with RPi4 specific
installer, boot, install, use. And then rewrite SD card for another SBC.

I see a difference.

As somebody who has used Raspbian now for years, quassel-core or FreedomBox is rather offputting, because I very much prefer true Debian that matches amd64 except for architecture. If I wanted to have some distribution that is "Debian based" and not Debian outright, I'd probably go for Raspberry Pi OS.

Let me be honest: if someone wants to use R/Pi SBC then R/Pi OS is what they should use. To not waste time of other distribution maintainers.

This way you get 'probably working' kernel with all out-of-tree patches needed to get board working and functional + set of packages with out-of-tree patches to get userspace running.

Debian, Fedora and other distros usually do not ship those out-of-tree patches because they are not even on a way to mainline projects.

The official arm64 install documentation lists as of today as supported arm64 boards:

Applied Micro (APM) Mustang/X-Gene T ARM Juno Development Platform

Has anybody of you seen these in the wild?

I booted bullseye on Mustang during last week.

Why is the Raspberry Pi 4 with UEFI or the stock boot process not listed here?

Because no one contributed it?

What can a mere Debian user like me do to improve this documentation

Check doc, write new one, send to maintainer. Or even to this ML.

Reply to: