Snappy RPi2 stable image #3 now available

Niklas Wenzel nikwen.developer at
Thu Jun 18 17:52:33 UTC 2015

Hi Ricardo,

Thank you for your reply. :)

Would it be possible to allocate some resources on one of the Canonical
servers to host a system-image server? Even if the images weren't built
automatically, it would help a lot if we didn't have to reflash our devices
every time a new image is available. Since most of you are uploading the
files to anyway, it would additionally save bandwith
as we would only have to download the diffs.
If we had an image server, most people (including me) would probably not
even mind if there was official support for the Pi or not...


2015-06-18 13:51 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Salveti de Araujo <
ricardo.salveti at>:

> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Niklas Wenzel
> <nikwen.developer at> wrote:
> > Hi Oliver,
> >
> > Thank you very much for your reply. Just to get that right: I didn't
> want to
> > criticize your work in any way!
> > I just think that if a post on a company's blog talks about a "very
> > successful collaboration" between two companies or organizations, it
> implies
> > that there is official support. That being said, I have to say that I'm
> > pretty disappointed by the marketing department promising things which
> > aren't met.
> As a result of the collaboration between both sides we now have a
> working snappy ubuntu core image for it, the main question remains
> regarding the official support for the board.
> The problem we have is that the current kernel we use for RPi2 is not
> the upstream one, and maintaining a separated tree is quite a bit of
> work. For the other targets we have (like beaglebone) it is a lot
> easier since we can just use the upstream generic kernel that the
> kernel team already maintains and publishes (the same tree you use on
> your desktop), so it's just a matter of providing a build for it.
> Since we're not currently doing the upstreaming work for the kernel
> tree (so it could also be produced from the same generic tree we use),
> and not pushing security/stable updates for it (but instead creating
> builds once we get updates from
> from time to time), we're not saying it's officially supported. As
> Ogra also said earlier, we'd also need to have all the bits and pieces
> available in the archive, and then have the resulted binaries imported
> by our system-image server (having it all upstream would make it a lot
> easier since we'd just be consuming the packages that are already in
> the archive).
> As the kernel snap is not available via the official channels (because
> what I described above), we can't enable updates without causing
> possible issues at the image side. But, you can still use the
> pre-built images and install/update the snaps that are available in
> the store (and use it for snappy related development).
> >> it is a community maintained image even though most maintainers work for
> >> canonical in this scenario ... once all bits and pieces are in the
> >> respective mainline branches i suspect we will also get officially
> >> supported images on the system-image server (or in the snap store after
> >> we moved snappy away from system-image one day).
> >>
> >> and with that said, it would actually be cool to have more community
> >> people involved into maintaining this community image (hint hint) ;)
> >
> > Would you mind elaborating which kind of work you want us to do?
> > How long do you think will it take until the Raspberry Pi 2 will be
> > officially supported?
> From what I see there are 2 fronts:
> 1 - Helping improving and maintaining the image we currently have (by
> helping fixing known issues, testing, and so on);
> 2 - Working to help upstreaming the remaining kernel changes for it to
> work fully based on upstream (requires kernel development experience).
> You can find a bit more information on that at
> Sorry for the confusion.
> Thanks,
> --
> Ricardo Salveti de Araujo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the snappy-devel mailing list