Rockbox General > Rockbox General Discussion

How many people still use old Archos devices?

<< < (2/5) > >>

Llorean:
Honestly, if I were doing the branch, I'd pick a specific release (3.8, or 3.9.1) and do the branch there since, ostensibly, those ought to be "known good" revisions, but given the amount of testing our releases actually get on that hardware, it might be best to just branch at the current version and let anyone who wants to maintain that hardware roll back changes that are detrimental.

JdGordon:
Alot of rockboxes customisability could be removed from a hwcodec fork which should reclaim quite a bit of wasted ram. The entire skin engine for example probably isnt needed (anyone really using those older targets probably doesnt care about its looks anyway). ditto icons and a bunch of stuff.

I have no interest in doing that but as usual will gladly help anyone to get it done if they wanted it. (removing skin engine shouldnt actually be too difficult)

saratoga:
Last I asked amiconn about it, he was not in favor.  However that was some years ago, so he may have different opinions now.  Since he knows hwcodec so well, he should probably agree before people get too excited.

JdGordon:
I believe that is pretty unlikely.
Apart from the code mess I don't think any features have been rejected because it wasnt possible to handle in an #ifdef-able way for hwcodec, but I'm getting very close to just blowing away all the charcell graphics code (which for me is a far bigger annoyance than HWCODEC per-se) which would possibly mean removing hwcodec anyway.

dreamlayers:
I looked at memory usage a bit this weekend:

The biggest difference is between a RomBox build without the database, and a normal build. I was able to build RomBox for v2 Recorder up to Rockbox 3.3 by disabling both the database and radio.

For a long time RAM usage doesn't increase that much. For example, unmodified r15545 (the version I based my modifications on) uses 515444, 3.3 uses 522524, and 3.6 uses 525456. However, r30920 uses 644792.

GCC 4.6.2 decreases RAM usage a bit when used with binutils-2.21.1a, compiling with -Os -flto -fuse-linker-plugin and linking with -fwhole-program in addition. Usage went from 644760 to 635228. Unfortunately, it crashes on boot. (Yes, I patched GCC.) To get it to compile I had to modify thread-sh.c and system-sh.c because functions get moved around, so UIE is too far away, and assembly is split into separate files, so asm labels used from C need .global. The modified code still works with 4.0.3.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page