Comments on: What would you like to see for ARM based embedded distro’s?

By: Elliot

Elliot — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:21:49 +0000

Java. Full java.

By: JamieBennett

JamieBennett — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:57:36 +0000

Dave, as you probably know, performance from the boot process onwards is a drive Canonical are very interested in, a drive that extends to the mobile team too. Its definitely on the radar, in fact if you look at the blueprints registered at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/MobileTeam/LucidSpecifications you can see some performance based initiatives already which will be followed by more when UDS starts next week.

By: Dave Neary

Dave Neary — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:01:52 +0000

Hi Jamie,

Did you see my email to mobile-devel-list@gnome.org recently? http://mail.gnome.org/archives/mobile-devel-list/2009-November/msg00000.html That wouuld be something I’d love to see Ubuntu Mobile involved in.

Cheers,
Dave.

By: Jamie Lokier

Jamie Lokier — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 07:27:03 +0000

I’m interested in “lower powered graphics acceleration”. Can you say a bit more about that? Thanks.

ARM have historically been a bit nasty with keeping instruction sets and peripheral data sheets secret, telling QEMU and other emulator developers that they can’t emulate it fully, and causing the disappearance of an open source ARM instruction set compatible CPU for FPGAs by threatening to sue. So I have a bit of a negative feeling about ARM, despite the great chips that are coming out. I do hope that is changing and they are going to embrace a more open attitude themselves!

By: Arun Raghavan

Arun Raghavan — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:09:18 +0000

I think one thing that is sorely missing in Ubuntu is the ability to build a cross-toolchain to match the toolchain on your Ubuntu ARM target. Cross-compiling apps is a fairly common use-case, IMO, and having the ability to generate matching cross-toolchains would go a long way in making it easier for embedded vendors to adopt Ubuntu on ARM.

By: JamieBennett

JamieBennett — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:22:29 +0000

I’m part of the Mobile ARM team which aims to bring ARM Linux support to many platforms. Sure, some of them are core business opportunities for my employer, Canonical, and get preferential treatment (no-brainer), but the wider eco-sphere also benefits for us fixing problems, making software available, and pushing new idea’s.

For instance, we already have an off-shoot of our distribution that works on the Nokia platforms, Mer, which is an excellent effort by the community to provide an alternative distribution for Nokia’s devices. This will benefit from the wider ARM support of Linux not just by us but other Linux vendors entering the ARM space.

For me personally, I want to improve ARM support for Linux, for Canonical, and for others interested in Linux on the ARM platform. For example, device-tree’s on ARM, which is a sore subject for some, is high on my list along with lower powered graphics acceleration and a more unified and faster boot process.

ARM is a major sleeping giant, and I’m here to make sure Linux is the default choice for ARM device manufacturers.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:02:51 +0000

Just browsed the “even more awesome than it is now link” and now I am positive that my thoughts were not what you were after. However, I stand by my comments that application support is critical for any platform – it must be useful and appealing to the target user population.

Cheers,
Chris.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:53:58 +0000

Hi,

I am interested in the N900. Being a Linux fan since first laborious trial with Fedora Core 5 and many upgrades and distros since (my main desktop distro is now Fedora 11 supported by Ubuntu 9.10), Maemo certainly appeals. However, application support will be critical. From a purely selfish perspective I am interested in guitar and keyboard educational/simulation applications such as those on the iphone, but I am not sure this is what you are after. Next would be OpenOffice or similar support to allow edit of MsOffice docs/spreadsheets etc.

Cheers,
Chris.