[Discourse.ros.org] [Embedded] Information for those using Raspberry Pi, Ubuntu Xenial, and ROS Kinetic

[ruffsl]

ruffsl February 16

suforeman: UPDATE: 2017-02-15: There is a better workaround available. Rather than use the "hold" feature, users may edit the config.txt and change the device_tree_address. The result should be the following lines:# set extended DT area #device_tree_address=0x100 #device_tree_end=0x8000 device_tree_address=0x02008000 Just to be clear, we would modify the /boot/config.txt file to comment out the old device_tree parameters, then only set the device_tree_address to be 0x02008000. In the launchpad thread you linked to, there was some references to ubuntu-pi-flavour-maker.org: ubuntu-pi-flavour-maker.org Ubuntu Pi Flavour Maker Ubuntu Pi Flavour Maker is a spin off from the Raspberry Pi 2 initiative for Ubuntu MATE. The basic idea is simple; make as many Ubuntu flavours for the Raspberry Pi 2 and the Raspberry Pi 3 we can. Did you try those yet? Does say the ubuntu-mate-16.04.2-desktop-armhf-raspberry-pi.img encounter that same issues? I'm going to try it with ROS in a bit.

---

Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.

To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.

[suforeman]

suforeman February 16

I did not attempt the alternate image because of the statement at the end of the thread ... Shuhao (shuhao) wrote on 2017-02-13: #41 The images listed on ubuntu-pi-flavour-maker and the one listed on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM/RaspberryPi is exactly the same. The same issue should exist on both systems.

[Rohan Agrawal]

rohbotics February 16

The non-server ubuntu-pi-flavor-maker builds are built using a different process, and don't seem to have this issue. They come with rpi-update and can easily run the RPi 'mainline' kernel (not the Ubuntu fork). I have been using lubuntu-16.04.2-desktop-armhf-raspberry-pi.img.xz with no issues. Rohan

---

Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.

---

In Reply To

suforeman February 16

I did not attempt the alternate image because of the statement at the end of the thread ... Shuhao (shuhao) wrote on 2017-02-13: #41 The images listed on ubuntu-pi-flavour-maker and the one listed on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM/RaspberryPi is exactly the same. The same issue should exist on both s…

[suforeman]

suforeman February 16

Today I am getting undiagnosed issues so I will try using the desktop image and then disable the GUI to have a facsimile of a server image.

---

Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.

---

In Reply To

rohbotics February 16

The non-server ubuntu-pi-flavor-maker builds are built using a different process, and don't seem to have this issue. They come with rpi-update and can easily run the RPi 'mainline' kernel (not the Ubuntu fork). I have been using lubuntu-16.04.2-desktop-armhf-raspberry-pi.img.xz with no issues. R…

[suforeman]

suforeman February 17

rohbotics:

The non-server ubuntu-pi-flavor-maker builds are built using a different process, and don't seem to have this issue.

I can confirm. I have a functioning instance of my LoCoRo project. I started with the Lubuntu image from ubuntu-pi-flavor-maker and disabled LXDE. Then treated like an Ubuntu server image. Everything worked as expected. The Ubuntu Bugs thread has demonstrated to me that "official Ubuntu support" for the Raspberry Pi is dubious at present and has an uncertain future. When the April drop of 17.04 occurs, things should be clearer one way or another. For ROS, it would be best for the community if it supported buildfarm installable packages for a "supported Raspberry Pi operating system". This translates to Raspbian. I've been trying to promote Ubuntu but I have to concede, its not an ideal situation for ROS.

---

Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.

---

In Reply To

suforeman February 16

Today I am getting undiagnosed issues so I will try using the desktop image and then disable the GUI to have a facsimile of a server image.

---

Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.

To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.

[Brad Bazemore]

sonyccd February 18

I have talked with Canonical about the problem of Raspberry Pi support. They told me the lack of work on the ubuntu raspberry pi is do to the focus on ubuntu core. I agree with their logic. There is little reason to run a full version of ubuntu on a RPI.

[suforeman]

suforeman February 18

I do see the attention to Ubuntu Core. This is why my previous conclusion was to suggest ROS to consider Raspbian or even one of the other fully supported Linux distributions for the Raspberry Pi audience. Here is where I see a divergence between ROS and Ubuntu as far as the Raspberry Pi is concerned. The majority of Raspberry Pi owners (and the focus of the Raspberry Pi org) is the experimentor, student, tinkerer, maker, learner, creator. Ubuntu Core appears to focus on IoT which is more of a commercial direction. Unless a lot more packages are constructed as Snaps, it leaves very little usefulness for a large segment of the Raspberry Pi user base. (You can't just "apt-get install" on Ubuntu Core. Is ROS considering a focus on Ubuntu Core? My personal activity with ROS is more "research" and "creator" and not IoT. None of the Taspbery Pi based projects I'm involved in are looking at Ubuntu Core.