Welcome to the forum!  FYI . . . next time try Torvalds . . .  Murdoch shouldn't have worked.

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

ToxicExMachina wrote:

Flatpak is also SystemD-exclusive package manager.

Nope: https://pkgs.alpinelinux.org/packages?n … ranch=edge

And it's spelled "systemd" FFS...

why does this trigger you so?

When people spell it that way it always makes me think of that manga/anime cartoon initial D

OalSkuul wrote:

Admin, please delete.

That is very selfish behaviour, threads on these boards are supposed to be a community resource. If you're upset because I accused you of hijacking the other thread then stop being such a baby and grow some thicker skin.

zapper wrote:

As for skipping to get a RISC-V chip,  I would only want that if Devuan or something better has support for Risc-V

Unofficial at the moment but they're working on it:

https://wiki.debian.org/RISC-V

Drew DeVault was working on porting Alpine Linux to RISC-V but I'm not sure how that's going:

https://drewdevault.com/2018/12/20/Port … ISC-V.html

https://lists.alpinelinux.org/~alpine/d … 0hifive%3E

Nothing concrete from OpenBSD yet though, unfortunately:

https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=160807140003965&w=2

But it looks like both FreeBSD and NetBSD have made some progress:

https://wiki.freebsd.org/riscv

http://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/riscv/

Yes you are right - the RK3399 is about the speed of the P8600, maybe even faster in some situations. Since I have both machines here I could run some benchmarks if you have something particular in mind?

And well, the LS1088 would be interesting as well. However, a single A53 core is not very fast, and therefore singlecore performance would be awful. Also, the Ten64 seems to be rather power hungry and I am not sure how this chip would perform with passive cooling in the MNT Reform.

Since your requirements seem to be freedom, security and performance I guess the current MNT Reform could be still a viable option as the X200 looses a lot in terms of security (especially in terms of virtualization). And the next option would be probably an upgraded MNT Reform if it gets released next. Yet I hope they will skip ARM and go directly for RISC-V. The mentioned SiFive chips also have no out-of-order execution, so they are not a bad option. Another interesting option on the horizon is Alibaba's 16-core RISC-V chip, but I doubt it is targeted at mobile devices at this stage:

https://www.techspot.com/news/81177-chi … -risc.html

Hi,

I have both a pinebook pro as well as several core2duo Lenovo Thinkpads (such as X200) and also considered getting an MNT Reform. Overall, I think that the MNT Reform is a great project and I hope they will be able to reuse most stuff (such as the case) for a future model with a different PCB. In particular, I am hoping for RISC-V using one of the SiFive cores that are already almost available for Mini-ITX desktops:

https://www.crowdsupply.com/sifive/hifive-unmatched

When considering ARM64, both the rk3399 and NXP's LS1088A might be an option. The LS1088A is used in this box which I find interesting as well:

https://www.crowdsupply.com/traverse-technologies/ten64

However, the rk3399 has the issue that it needs a blob for DDR4 training, but this afaik applies to the current MNT Reform as well. Future Rockchip SoCs might be interesting as well, but if you consider that the pinebook pro still does not run an official version of Debian or Devuan shows that new SoCs really need some time for being supported well enough without tons of unofficial patches.

When comparing performance, I found geekbench.com to be an interesting option as it supports multiple architectures. So, if you want to compare the a typical Core2Duo P8600 with the RK3399 the data looks roughly like this:

P8600: 250 (single), 500 (multi)
RK3399: 250 (single), 700 (multi)
iMX8MQ: (unfortunately not benchmarked)

So YES, the rk3399 is almost as fast as an P8600. BTW: The fastest libre x86 option from the core2duo generation is a quadcore CPU in a T400 or T500 (requires some modding):

Q9000: 300 (single), 1000 (mutli)

However, if you consider running a "me cleaned" X230 with an i7 CPU as a viable option as well you will notice that the X230 is still waaay faster (not talking about quadcore i7 in a W530):

i7-3620M: 650 (single), 1500 (multi)

Overall, I am pretty optimistic that we will see some very interesting new options in 2021 and 2022 both based on ARM64 and RISC-V. Regarding PPC64LE (POWER9, POWER10), I am not that optimistic, at least for mobile.

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

Erm, not sure. Tracking the cache, perhaps?

I asked startpage.com and it said https://www.noulakaz.net/2019/04/09/dis … t-need-it/

and therein is the answer. This is why i dislike where gnome is heading.

Rod wrote:

Is it? I think this is a better answer...

Thanks Ron

manyroads wrote:

I personally keep my wine secure in the cellar...

In a nutshell:

Dont use "Wine", Use "Windows" in a non personal computer.

dice wrote:

Ive just disabled uefi altogether

No, you haven't. You've enabled CSM ("Legacy" mode), which emulates non-UEFI booting via your machine's UEFI firmware. This means the machine is still open to the many UEFI firmware vulnerabilities.

dice wrote:

my drives are encrypted so good luck to anyone who can get info off them

If you have a rootkit then it can read the contents of the drive once the system is running. Secure Boot would help prevent rootkits from running. It's far from perfect but it is an extra layer of protection.

And before anybody starts bleating about not trusting Microsoft's keys note that it is possible to create your own keys, enrol them in the UEFI firmware and sign the kernel images with them. That's how I have enabled Secure Boot in my Alpine Linux system.

Ulysses_ wrote:

Can't we mix some of MX into devuan?

Why would you want to do that after this post of yours?

MX/AntiX is the work of a state-sponsored political extremist who is openly in the payroll of a state and at the same time pretends to be against the system. Can't be trusted for anything to do with security, privacy, cryptocurrencies, anti-surveillance. Might as well install ubuntu.

https://www.linuxquestions.org/question … ost6188829

Read on for more laughs later in the same thread

steve_v wrote:

dice wrote:

without apple we wouldnt have the hackintosh

Once, long ago, apple was a respectable company with some pretty nice hardware and a loyal hacker following.
That all changed with the ipod, when someone realised there was more money to be made selling pretty disposable toys and building vendor lock-in to keep people coming back.

yeah i know, birth of the smart technology, all the cool hackable tech got rail roaded way back then in favor of the igotsuckedinto apple marketing. I bought an apple ipod 2nd gen when it came out after hearing so much about it mid 2000's, as soon as i realised what a shitfight it was to make the thing work with itunes and such, that was the last apple tech i bought. Its good to see how gnu and linux can hack into macintosh given the right parameters, jobs would be rolling in his grave at that!