On Mar 23, 2014 6:44 AM, "Peter Robinson" pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
I don't have an issue with ARM (or PPC) builds of the workstation, but I don't think we should decide to make them officially supported
platforms
before we feel very certain there is a viable community and ecosystem
around
them to make the product workable medium to long term on those
platforms.
This means of cause the basic lithmus test of having the shell 'work'
on a specific
piece of hardware, but also there needs to be a viable roadmap for that
hardware
going forward. I mean I don't want a situation where we declare ARM
supported
because someone got a build working on a specific dev board, only to
have the
manufacturer of that devboard switch GPU provider in the next iteration
and leave
us without a working open driver.
Believe me you are not alone in that regard, it's a discussion the ARM people have on a regular basis. We've already had one vendor and another SoC go from hero to zero in a short period of time :-)
Rob Clark is doing stellar work on Freedreno and the new Broadcom
source code release
is good news in this regard, but I think I personally need to feel that
a
officially supported ARM platform needs to be something we can believe
will
continue to exist and not a one shot 'the stars aligned for us'
situation.
Personally I'm not sure either of those are of much value. The QCom devices are primarily used in phones which aren't really targets for Fedora ARM. There's currently one dev board I'm aware of and it's not widely available and it's not currently anywhere on our roadmap when it comes to the kernel.
I'm guessing you're referring to this: http://mydragonboard.org/db8074/ Although listed as a SoM, it looks like the carrier board is optional with the 12V jack. No idea about the availability, though, but should certainly be capable of running any of the workstation products... if it can actually run any of the workstation products...
<snip>