On 2007-12-13, Loginov Alexander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ......... >> Because that's the last time somebody paid developers to do the >> work involved in a public "release". > > Thanks for your comments. Now a bit clearer why the releases > are not available. But it is quite strange: there is > eCosCentric but no releases.
There are releases. That's what eCosPro is. > Normally the commercial companies that are at the back of the > open-source project, do this job. Check RTEMS for example. No thanks, I'm not going to check RTEMS. > ........ >> If you don't want to hear answers, then don't ask questions. > > Irrelevant note. Not all the phrases are to be understood > directly. There are idioms in each language. That was one of > them. Don't take it out of the context. In that context it > meant: "I don't think so" if you wish > > ........ >> Utter bullshit. They do have bugs, but so do releases. Neither >> is "supposed to have bugs". > > My mistake, I meant to say "expected to have bugs". Here is > the standard note from a standard open-source project CVS > tree: "...the CVS code is always moving in features and > stability. While very attempt is made to keep the CVS head > working on all targets, but there are no any guarantees". I wasn't aware that there was a standard for open-source projects. > ....... >> Bah. Nobody intentionally checks in bugs. > > Depends. In the area of safety-critical systems, it is a > standard debugging methodology: you intentionally introduce > bugs in the systems to see how it can recover itself . You don't check them into CVS. > ... ... >> There are no "stable releases" of Linux any more. Active >> development is being done in the "stable" tree. There are no >> more stable and development versions of Linux like there used >> to be. > > Linux itself - yes. But not its distros. The new releases are normally > produced every 3-6 months. If you want a stable release of eCos then use eCosPro and stop whinging at us. > ... ... >> On the contrary, we are all from the world of commercial >> products development. That's what eCos is used for: developing >> commercial products. I've been using eCos to develop >> commercial products for 7+ years, and the lack of "releases" >> hasn't been even the least bit of a problem. > > That is your personal experience and your personal area of > expertise in particular commercial product area. Products that > are expected to have high reliability standards are rarely > developed from CVS software snapshots. Products that have high reliability standards do their own testing and "releasing". They don't depend on the "releases" of open-source packages to be bug-free. >> If you feel you're not capable of working from a CVS repository >> and really want a "released" version, then that's what eCosPro >> is: http://www.ecoscentric.com/ecos/ecospro.shtml > > Thanks. I have already checked it. Definitely, if we stick to eCos we > will buy the support from eCosCentric. I'm glad to hear it. >> Perhaps one of those RTOSes will meet your privilege >> management requirement better than eCos. > > Unfortunately, they are either too expensive (the royalty fees > would cost us thousand or even millions of dollars) and most > of them normally don't provide source code. If they do provide > it, then it costs another hundreds of thousands. Releases cost money. > By the way, do you now any more-or-less free RTOS that > provides support for privilege levels and process protection? Nope, I can't afford the dollars or watts for processors that have those sorts of features. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! I'm a fuschia bowling at ball somewhere in Brittany visi.com -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
