IRC #olimex 2021-01-07[04:43:37] <hacktivista> joOnas: pff... that's just names of companies... it's OK... I've came to see that all major chip manufacturers aren't interested in software freedom
[04:44:58] <hacktivista> while open hardware projects (e.g. boards) are increasingly more common, open hardware chips are almost unexistent
[04:46:07] <hacktivista> so... in any case the thing I'll be dealing with non-ideal conditions
[04:47:22] <hacktivista> what's relevant at this time and age regarding flashing, is that controllers are free, and that's all about it
[05:41:23] <hacktivista> *drivers
[10:54:43] <Tsvetan> hacktivista we all know there is good reason chips to be closed ;) contrary to the software developers, the chips manbufacturers are still in the stone age, all existing chips are full of bugs and no one wants to expose his dirty laundry to others
[10:59:12] <Tsvetan> We worked with MCU of one of the top silicon vendors let's not write the name here, but one of their chips have something like 6 silicon revisions and in each new revision they fix old bugs reported, but introduce new bugs for peripherials which worked fine in the older revisions. But at least Western companies document well their bugs.
[11:01:12] <Tsvetan> so fully open source silicon IMO will be possible when silicon developers learn to fix their bugs (my guess not going to happen in the next 20 years) they work with overpriced (no competition) single source CAD products which produce garbage which is not possible to simulate and test completely until the masks and prototypes are done.
[11:02:50] <Tsvetan> Also to have access to silicon sources while you have no affordable tools which allow you to edit and modify these is rather useless
[11:25:35] <hacktivista> yeah... we are in stone age regarding chips manufacture really
[11:26:10] <hacktivista> although there's a trend during last years of people pushing to change that... like what we had regarding software freedom in the 90s
[12:55:33] <jo0nas> Tsvetan: regarding ethernet trouble with STMP1 board that you write about on your blog, did you try switch to rgmii-id mode, and calibrate in device-tree at the PHY (instead of at the MAC like it is done with existing LIME2 boards - which I suspect is wrong)
[12:55:53] <jo0nas> ...and do you prefer that I ask such questions here or as comments to the blog entry?
[21:56:15] <Asara> jo0nas: I just started using your image on the lime2. I am mostly just running some basic linux apps on it. one of them requires go-1.5 which is in bullseye but not buster. Is it safe to just update sources.list from buster to bullseye/testing?
[22:04:31] <Asara> ACTION finds out
[22:43:22] <Asara> okay that worked pretty well. just had to manually install `cpp-8 gcc-8-base` after the apt upgrade/dist-upgrade.
[22:50:30] <malina> heya. I see er, your cases for lime2 are out of stock? how long is it before they are back again or?
[22:50:47] <malina> also, was is difference between erm te A20 and "T2" versions, was it?