Kali Linux

[monmoonmooonmoooon]

Hey guys,

I have a few questions, I already ask them by PM in Kickstarter, but since I dont receive yet the answer I will ask it here.

1 - Will Pine64+ run Kali Linux? I know they have a ARM version, but since ARM64 is new, will you guys talk with them?
2 - Will exist a version with 4GB Ram? I am asking this because for Kali, more ram is better
3 - Will the box with Pine64+ bring a charger?

Thanks in advance

[tkaiser]

With Kali you can use the armhf architecture (compiled for ARMv7) and then the whole '64 bit' thing is pretty useless (the '64 bit' mean more than 4 GB virtual address space -- and you know the A64 can not address more than 2 GB physical RAM? -- and a potential performance gain *if* you recompile kernel and userland for ARMv8)

But be assured: As soon as it's able to boot a Linux kernel on the A64 you will see new Linux OS images being released every few days. One more crappy than the other.

The most important stuff regarding Linux has to happen somewhere else: Drivers and mainlining efforts for kernel and u-boot (currently just an outdated 3.10.65 available)

[monmoonmooonmoooon]

With Kali you can use the armhf architecture (compiled for ARMv7) and then the whole '64 bit' thing is pretty useless (the '64 bit' mean more than 4 GB virtual address space -- and you know the A64 can not address more than 2 GB physical RAM? -- and a potential performance gain *if* you recompile kernel and userland for ARMv8)

But be assured: As soon as it's able to boot a Linux kernel on the A64 you will see new Linux OS images being released every few days. One more crappy than the other.

The most important stuff regarding Linux has to happen somewhere else: Drivers and mainlining efforts for kernel and u-boot (currently just an outdated 3.10.65 available)

So I can run Kali on Pine64+, right?
And I dont need 4Gb Ram, right?

I need to look deeper in this ARM concept than 

[tkaiser]

If you want it slow --> choose Kali (unless Kali also supports the arm64 architecture and not only armhf the '64 bit' the Pine64+ is advertised with are pretty useless for you). And whether you need 4GB RAM is a question that only you yourself can answer. At least you're not able to use more than 2 GB since the A64 SoC used on Pine64+ can't deal with more physical RAM.

In other words: Kali will be available since every armhf Linux flavour will be available sometimes in the future (sadfully -- I would suspect some crazy mind will even give Raspbian with ARMv6 code a try). You won't see great performance improvements unless Kali adopts changes to support also arm64/ARMv8. But since Kali is just another Debian and Debian already supports ARMv8 someone a bit familiar with Kali will be able to switch from armhf to arm64 in the build scripts easily.

Again: That's not important at all. The magic happens somewhere else since without proper driver support for the A64 (and more recent kernel version) every Linux flavour on the Pine64 will feel a bit crappy.

[monmoonmooonmoooon]

If you want it slow --> choose Kali (unless Kali also supports the arm64 architecture and not only armhf the '64 bit' the Pine64+ is advertised with are pretty useless for you). And whether you need 4GB RAM is a question that only you yourself can answer. At least you're not able to use more than 2 GB since the A64 SoC used on Pine64+ can't deal with more physical RAM.

In other words: Kali will be available since every armhf Linux flavour will be available sometimes in the future (sadfully -- I would suspect some crazy mind will even give Raspbian with ARMv6 code a try). You won't see great performance improvements unless Kali adopts changes to support also arm64/ARMv8. But since Kali is just another Debian and Debian already supports ARMv8 someone a bit familiar with Kali will be able to switch from armhf to arm64 in the build scripts easily.

Again: That's not important at all. The magic happens somewhere else since without proper driver support for the A64 (and more recent kernel version) every Linux flavour on the Pine64 will feel a bit crappy.

Thanks for the clarification 

[joe]

if you know the software name you can install , you don't need to use kali linux , kali linux base on ubuntu

[monmoonmooonmoooon]

if you know the software name you can install  , you don't need to use kali linux , kali linux base on ubuntu

dam, yep you are absolutely right 

I forgot about that option! Thanks a lot! 

[joe]

if you know the software name you can install  , you don't need to use kali linux , kali linux base on ubuntu

dam, yep you are absolutely right 

I forgot about that option! Thanks a lot! 

sorry , kali linux is base on debian

[monmoonmooonmoooon]

if you know the software name you can install  , you don't need to use kali linux , kali linux base on ubuntu

dam, yep you are absolutely right 

I forgot about that option! Thanks a lot! 

sorry , kali linux is base on debian

Yep but Ubuntu is based on Debian too, so your statement is still true

[retired firefighter]

if you know the software name you can install  , you don't need to use kali linux , kali linux base on ubuntu

dam, yep you are absolutely right 

I forgot about that option! Thanks a lot! 

sorry , kali linux is base on debian

Yep but Ubuntu is based on Debian too, so your statement is still true

While Ubuntu is a fork of Debian, it has diverged sufficiently that most Linux developers consider it a separate OS.  The fact that both use apt-get and related for package maintenance doesn't change the fact that, while some software packages from one distro can be used in the other distro, many will not - and the problem seems more severe when trying to add a Debian package to an Ubuntu install.

Ubuntu's focus is toward a more cutting edge software base, while Debian (like Slackware) is oriented toward stability and security, with little concern for releasing new versions until they've been thoroughly tested.  Hence, Debian's current stable, jessie, is v8.X and Slackware sits at v14.1, compared to, what, v15.10 for Ubuntu?  This, despite the fact that Slack and Debian are the two oldest actively maintained distros, dating back to the earliest days of Linux.

Kali, like Ubuntu, was originally forked from Debian (not Ubuntu), but has since grown apart in a fashion similar to Ubuntu.  It has, so far, maintained enough continuity that the majority of Debian's .debs are still compatible.  Several Linux devs/sysadmins have told me that, though the Kali team initially considered Ubuntu as their base distro, they quickly determined that it was too buggy and too insecure, so chose Debian-testing instead.

Both Debian and Slackware offer ARM versions, and vast software repositories, with large dev teams backing them.  I intend to explore their resources before those of Ubuntu.