GP2X Gph Cvs?

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by MiniMoose, Jan 17, 2006.

?

Should GPH set up a CVS server for community contributions?

  1. Yes, ASAP

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Yes, they should form an alliance with Open2X, provide them with the full source, and make them the

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Open2X is good enough for me

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. I plan to never use official GPH firmware

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. MiniMoose

    MiniMoose Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2005
    Messages:
    125
    So far GPH hasn't fully embraced the F/OSS business model by not providing a CVS server and a person/people to submit patches to.

    If they were to make this move, then the community effort to build better firmware that is currently in orbit around Open2X could shift to focusing on the official firmware tree.

    If GPH doesn't have the manpower, then maybe they should form an alliance with the Open2X guys, provide them with the full source, and make that the site for official firmware development.
     
    Tags:
  2. Robster

    Robster Dodgy hardware mod maker

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    439
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Missing option: GPH will never listen to us, so why bother even trying?

    Sorry to be negative, but it is obvious that GPH are not interested in their western customers, and it's only due to craigix's damned hard work that they are even slightly moving on the GPL issues. Let's get whatever code we can, and see what we can do with it, and forget about GPH.

    I wonder if they realise how completely they are alienating their customers? I don't think I will ever buy another Gamepark product.
     
  3. barnesy

    barnesy Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Messages:
    484
    I reckon all this trouble getting GPH source code just means it'll take the dev community longer to surpass all of GPH's efforts. It'll still happen. I doubt GPH realise that, but the cynic in me wonders if that's some of the reason they're dragging their feet.
     
  4. DJWillis

    DJWillis Random GP32/GP2X/Wiz & Pandora Moocher

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,467
    Location:
    Bath, Somerset, UK
    All the GPL code is sub contacted out to DignSys don’t forget, so there are two parties that could be said to be dragging there feet ;).

    One of my drives behind Open2x in the 1st place was to create a dialogue with DignSys/GPH and work with them to establish a way community improvements and patches (via Open2x or otherwise) could be incorporated into the stock GP2X kernel.

    Recent events, the whole drawn out GPL situation (I am not going there) and the state of dialogue with various parties currently leads me to feel that such an open, community focused, method of feeding GP2X source back is very unlightly to happen at all and not in the near future for sure.

    That won’t stop me working with some very talented devs to get the Open2x Linux kernel work off the ground once the GPL situation is clarified and make community kernels focused on stability and functionality a reality.

    I also personally favour an approach that works well with kernel modules to make things like switching the functionality of the NetChip 2272 (and other multi-state hardware) on a fly a real possibility (and easy).
     
  5. aapje89

    aapje89 Still here...

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,753
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I have to agree on that, but who has ever thought of that?
    It seemed at first that gph was interested in her costumers (they were even asking if we wanted 32/64mb of ram)... :(
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 19, 2015
  6. DijiTao

    DijiTao Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    572
    I know -- I just don't get it, how did we get to this point? I have to hope this is all just one massive misunderstanding...
     
  7. MiniMoose

    MiniMoose Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2005
    Messages:
    125
    One option is to push to get the full source tree from GPH and then completely forget about them. If everybody starts using the Open2X firmware, it will become the established standard.
     
  8. Hooka

    Hooka That Guy!

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Messages:
    1,737
    Location:
    Canada
    They didn't ask us about 32/64MB of ram we demanded it enough (same with tv out) and they still haven't made linux able to access more than 32MB of it anyways :p
     
  9. timbobsteve

    timbobsteve Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2005
    Messages:
    301
    If dialogue continues along the path it is at now, then DJWillis is right in saying an open community GPH CVS is not a possability. If and When we get the source code (and my god it better be up to date!!!!) then we would be best to just take it and start over... make our own standard... especially with the modularisation... would be great to have a settings menu that you can just unload a bunch of unused modules (e.g. I don't use TV-out... so i could disable it) of course the modularization is not for everyone... so a basic setup might be nice for general users. Anyways... the source is supposedly released Next week.... just read it on this thread:

    http://www.gp32x.de/board/index.php?showtopic=24611&st=60#

    Supposedly it was this week... but DignSys are doing "another more improtant" project.... It also offers some idea as to why source code was late on arrival... still no excuse seing as how GPH and gp32x.de both have plents of web space to host the sources.

    Anyways.... soon my pretties... very soon... we will have the source and then.... THE WORLD!!!!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 2, 2016
  10. BradN

    BradN Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    577
    Personally, I would have thought a 48/16MB split would be more useful than 32/32... how much RAM do you need for the 2nd CPU?
     
  11. racoon

    racoon Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2005
    Messages:
    236
    Even if the 2nd CPU is not as fast and does only have 4kb Cache (compared to 16kb) it's using up 32MB because it's supposed to have this space dedicated for video replaying (or that's what I know).
    The modules could also be (un)loaded dynamically so the user doesn't even have to get really involved, or am I wrong? ;)


    EDIT: DIGNSYS has got a more important project... erm, sorry? I was supposed not to get angry at them but now... they better release it next week for real and not tell us another excuse...
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 19, 2015
  12. Muncher666

    Muncher666 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2005
    Messages:
    339
    Actually, they're supposed to release it THIS week. :)

    I wonder if they realise they'll have blood on their hands if they don't get it in on time..

    Allan.
     
  13. racoon

    racoon Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2005
    Messages:
    236
    You are right, Allan... I wanted to edit my post again yesterday but it didn't work right away and I had to get some sleep ;D .

    I read these News from ED in the german gp2x community... He said they got an important project from an important customer and if they do not finish that project this week they would have to pay... >< ....
    That's their lame excuse for this week ...
    Anyways, if they don't come up with the firmware update and the most recent source the FSF should visit 'em.... they won't make them pay, but they will surely make them release the source once and for all !!! :X

    I am really annoyed by these guys, they better speed up so we get our lightning-fast community-driven firmware development :D *yay!* !!
     
  14. timbobsteve

    timbobsteve Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2005
    Messages:
    301
    Crap... I didn't read all the options... just clicked the first one cause I want an official CVS setup....

    Anyways, there is a little part of me in every one of those options. Part says "give us the code then go back into oblivion so we can make a better kernel", part of me says "I will only use open2X"... so yeh...
     
  15. BradN

    BradN Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    577
    Well, 16 megs of memory would be enough for 23 uncompressed frames of video at the max resolution and 16bbp, just seems like 32 is overkill.

    On my computer, mplayer does a 720x480 mpeg4 with memory usage 23-14MB and 11-9MB on the two processes (resident minus shared), so that's a max of 11MB (9+2) that could be put on the 2nd CPU with no MMU, unless GPH or dignsys did a lot of weird modifications that make it more RAM hungry. *shrug*
     

Share This Page

Loading...