[ Reorganized to use inline replies ]
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Kevin Gunn <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Matthias Klose <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> LP: #1586026 asks for the removal of binary packages on arm64 which cannot
>> built with OpenGL ES. Do we really have to cripple an architecture like
>> I don't see any discussion about this. How does this affect things like
>> accelerators and CUDA aware packages?
> hey Matthias,
> after reading the bug, it's implied the binaries being asked for removal
> were somehow built with gl (possibly sw implementation of gl?)....please
> as to the request, never say never, but at least i've never seen an arm
> chipset in the wild with a gl enabled gpu (like the bug indicates they're
> all gles).
> so i'm not sure of the value of having those binaries present where at least
> in real application, there's no gl ?
Ubuntu supports a growing number of ARM servers that have PCIe slots,
so external GPUs can be added. CUDA is supported on those platforms
And I do know there are users interested in CUDA on Ubuntu/arm64.
I'm not experienced with CUDA myself - and don't have a card to test it - but
it would be good to know if we're breaking that use case ahead of time.
ubuntu-devel mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel