-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 01/27/2017 12:20 PM, Andrés Domínguez wrote:
2017-01-26 16:12 GMT+01:00 ron minnich rminnich@gmail.com:
A decade later? You should buy a new computer.
Core 2 duo is more than a decade old and I think that it should be good enough for a lot of tasks.
Andrés
Something to think about: have you tried developing modern software on that Core 2 Duo? Are you OK with only having hardware that can consume software (libre or not) that was created (compiled) on more powerful, non-free systems?
I'd like to see some discussion on this particular topic, especially since it ties in so closely with the start of GNU and libre software as we know it today -- it was recognised early on that a libre compiler was needed for libre software to be truly free. Yet here we are, again restricting the tools needed to compile software to non-free systems.
Apologies if this is off topic. :-)
- -- Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) https://www.raptorengineering.com
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 10:28 AM Timothy Pearson < tpearson@raptorengineering.com> wrote:
Yet here we are, again restricting the tools needed to compile software to non-free systems.
we can change the subject.
I still believe that if libre is your goal x86 and arm are a lost cause. I still think if you're looking 5 or more years out riscv has a good chance of being what we want.
ron
On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 12:26:56 -0600 Timothy Pearson tpearson@raptorengineering.com wrote:
<snip>
Core 2 duo is more than a decade old and I think that it should be good enough for a lot of tasks.
Andrés
Something to think about: have you tried developing modern software on that Core 2 Duo? Are you OK with only having hardware that can consume software (libre or not) that was created (compiled) on more powerful, non-free systems?
I think the need for libre hardware platforms in the range of a Core 2 Duo is as strong as the need for libre platforms capable of compiling big software projects.
The point you raise is very important(!), however just because you cannot compile big software projects on e.g. C2D Penryn doesn't mean that there is no need for them. I have the impression that this is sometimes forgotten when reading discussions about libre hardware for general purpose computing.
Regards,
Merlin
On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 12:26:56 -0600 Timothy Pearson tpearson@raptorengineering.com wrote:
<snip>
Core 2 duo is more than a decade old and I think that it should be good enough for a lot of tasks.
Andrés
Something to think about: have you tried developing modern software on that Core 2 Duo? Are you OK with only having hardware that can consume software (libre or not) that was created (compiled) on more powerful, non-free systems?
I think the need for libre hardware platforms in the range of a Core 2 Duo is as strong as the need for libre platforms capable of compiling big software projects.
The point you raise is very important(!), however just because you cannot compile big software projects on e.g. C2D Penryn doesn't mean that there is no need for them. I have the impression that this is sometimes forgotten when reading discussions about libre hardware for general purpose computing.
Regards,
Merlin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 01/27/2017 01:41 PM, Merlin Büge wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 12:26:56 -0600 Timothy Pearson tpearson@raptorengineering.com wrote:
<snip>
Core 2 duo is more than a decade old and I think that it should be good enough for a lot of tasks.
Andrés
Something to think about: have you tried developing modern software on that Core 2 Duo? Are you OK with only having hardware that can consume software (libre or not) that was created (compiled) on more powerful, non-free systems?
I think the need for libre hardware platforms in the range of a Core 2 Duo is as strong as the need for libre platforms capable of compiling big software projects.
Fair enough. I wouldn't even be bringing this up except for the fact that we're in the final stages of losing access to development-class libre systems for "normal people" (non-corporate entities), and this has introduced an interesting philosophical dilemma on the nature of libre software.
As always, I appreciate the insight from this list!
- -- Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) https://www.raptorengineering.com
On 01/27/2017 03:18 PM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 01/27/2017 01:41 PM, Merlin Büge wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 12:26:56 -0600 Timothy Pearson tpearson@raptorengineering.com wrote:
<snip>
Core 2 duo is more than a decade old and I think that it should be good enough for a lot of tasks.
Andrés
Something to think about: have you tried developing modern software on that Core 2 Duo? Are you OK with only having hardware that can consume software (libre or not) that was created (compiled) on more powerful, non-free systems?
I think the need for libre hardware platforms in the range of a Core 2 Duo is as strong as the need for libre platforms capable of compiling big software projects.
Fair enough. I wouldn't even be bringing this up except for the fact that we're in the final stages of losing access to development-class libre systems for "normal people" (non-corporate entities), and this has introduced an interesting philosophical dilemma on the nature of libre software.
As always, I appreciate the insight from this list!
Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) https://www.raptorengineering.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYi6sMAAoJEK+E3vEXDOFb88AH/0/ZlhCyVat6WfzN8nNhKY7c hpgi7ZrbWOMePKZI5HS5k0qa9n/8k7Lyelmi0qrnv+/v+6T4Ave/jkZOdlAN/Z6O t1fj003GNvnL4Gks6v7A/wGxibfVLNX6Kk8T/Z6+Vk69b0KAqtJm2e2CB5bhewzC NvkqgWYIGpKJMOLDZ5YCrYXOHZQre55Civreze9Y14LjPZOLXeuEg/ZlijJPpESk nJhU2+G36BgVE/hiS2gAkZVfsRY09iFdc7byDJ16AldESRB+M+eGg5I4OpN//HT/ YlEygkxW1VLSxPU0bnxNO1AfMTQK6LqUfdyZ9jD8crTYFVocS30Qw6cwo9odpFA= =hRin -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I don't understand why a C2DM is mentioned here, everyone seems to forget about the late gen C2QM's which are good enough for compiling free software on the go - they have IOMMU as well (although it lacks interrupt remapping). The lenovo G505S from 2013 is also an option for a libre laptop, it has a legit IOMMU with IR.
It isn't so much that you can't find user-ownable devices it is just that either they are very underpowered (novena) or they cost a large amount of money (POWER) - it is the hollowing out of the middle that is happening in every market segment where you only have low end and high end absolutely no middle. When I get a job again I will fund the development of a reasonably priced POWER device such as the S812LC, I hope I will not be the only one. (4.5K is reasonable for what you get, KGPE-D16 brand new in 2012 plus processors/ram/etc would be actually cost more money)
The free software community is like a frog in boiling water, they don't notice and or care until one day they can't install linux at all on an x86-64 computer and by then it will be too late - there are so many linux sysadmins and companies that benefit from it, yet so little money put towards free hardware
However in the future as always I am sure there will be useful idiots like Red Hat that will make a sweetheart deal with MS for an "approved" "open source" (but tivo'ized) distro where you can only install pre-compiled software from official repos, that is unless you get a developer account from wintel for the small very reasonable fee of $500. Secure Boot 2.0 doesn't have the owner controllable mandate like 1.0, but of course red-hat has a special pre-compiled signed version of grub to "help" us.
2017-01-27 19:26 GMT+01:00 Timothy Pearson tpearson@raptorengineering.com:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 01/27/2017 12:20 PM, Andrés Domínguez wrote:
2017-01-26 16:12 GMT+01:00 ron minnich rminnich@gmail.com:
A decade later? You should buy a new computer.
Core 2 duo is more than a decade old and I think that it should be good enough for a lot of tasks.
Andrés
Something to think about: have you tried developing modern software on that Core 2 Duo?
I used to build "modern" software in 2008 with a fast core 2 quad core and it was a pain, I'm sure that it's also a pain now. I really appreciate what you are doing trying to promote more open and powerful power8/9 systems, but computers have life beyong building software, their main goal is to run it. I don't build android on my phone, the linux kernel on my router and neither in my chromebook. I don't like most of the modern software, but some of it is pleasant to build even in older computers.
What I understand was the question is if upgrading the cpu microcode it is not a risk, and even if I agree that it was a risk trusting the hardware/firmware in the first place, every time you upgrade the microcode it's a new possible vector. It's better not to need to upgrade any microcode and if needed, at least something easily auditable.
Andrés
P.S. I'm not saying that people should not upgrade the microcode, just that the risk exists.
On 2017-01-27 at 12:26:56 -0600, Timothy Pearson wrote:
Something to think about: have you tried developing modern software on that Core 2 Duo? Are you OK with only having hardware that can consume software (libre or not) that was created (compiled) on more powerful, non-free systems?
Please, define "modern software".
I have a deep (mostly) irrational hostility towards (libre|open)office, so i have never tried to compile it (and suspect it may be problematic, but not only because of performance issues).
Other than that, I have an X200 as my main (only, mostly) working computer, updated to the maximum 8GB or RAM (which btw I'm only able to fill when running multiple virtual machines). For my $DAY_JOB I'm mostly working on what I believe is quite a common type of modern software: web applications written in an interpreted language, and that works on such a machine with absolutely no issue.
Lately I've compiled a couple of QT programs written by other people, and I don't remember waiting a significantly longer time than expected; it compares with the time spent running a full testsuite on some of the projects I'm working on, so I expect that I could work on developing such software with no big stumbling block from my computer's performances. Out of curiosity I've just compiled one of the heaviest programs I'm using, darktable, and that took 10 minutes *including downloading all of the dependencies in a chroot* and compiling from scratch (I used the package building tools, because I have them installed and configured, instead of having to install a dev environment).
I haven't (cross-)compiled a full OS for a few years; back when I was using openembedded and did it I was using an even more limited computer and yes, it could take hours. Nowadays however I'm mostly using debian and packages that somebody else have compiled, usually on ARM boards¹ that aren't exactly known for their raw computing power.
¹ Debian doesn't crosscompile their "other" architectures.
One thing that would probably be problematic is compiling something like the android SDK: that's an issue for freedom, but that's not really required to work on modern software *for the free-ish computer I'm using*. Also, IIRC it is something that already required something like 8-16 GB or RAM a few years ago, when this computer would have been considered quite new, and would have come with 4GB RAM max.
-
Andrés Domínguez -
Elena ``of Valhalla'' -
Merlin Büge -
ron minnich -
Taiidan＠gmx.com -
Timothy Pearson