On 5/18/2012 4:28 PM, Eric Keller wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Kent A. Reed<kentallanr...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Gentle persons: >> >> The recent email discussions about ARM-based cpus on the one hand and >> about progress with the PREEMPT_RT patch on the other got me to >> wondering about RTAI and where it is going. >> > Generally, the kernel and the distribution is decoupled enough that just > moving to a new distribution does not require a new kernel. Of course, the > linux developers don't always have considerations about limiting the amount > of work they cause other developers as their highest priority. I am > thinking of moving at least some of our computers at work to Centos because > they promise very long term support. > Eric >
I agree with your first statement, Eric. That's why I mentioned in my original message that I am personally comfortable mixing and matching kernels and distributions. Judging from the conversations on emc-users, I believe there are many who are not. From the Wiki: --- "Why are there packages only for 8.04 and 10.04 "We have chosen to use 8.04 and 10.04 because they are "long term support" (LTS) releases. If you use an LTS release, you can be sure of support and security fixes from the Ubuntu team for 3-5 years." --- I believe most users expect this to be a sliding scale, e.g., as 10.04 LTS reaches its end-of-support life, this will read "We have chosen to use 10.04 and 12.04...." I also believe they will expect the use of 12.04 to include the coverage of new hardware known to kernel version 3.2.whatever. If my pessimism is justified and the RTAI/Adeos development lags behind this kernel version, perhaps not even making the jump to kernel release 3 any time soon, it seems to me we will have to either stay with 8.04 and 10.04 or include 12.04 but with a downgraded kernel version 2.6.x. I am not suggesting this can't be done. I am suggesting that the Board ought to have a plan in place to manage user (and developer) expectations before the event occurs, not after. Regards, Kent PS - as an aside, when I introduced Linux into my group's lab computers years ago it was via RHEL. I was not alone. Once they realized they could keep Linux out, our agency's IT group relented and took on the task of providing an "as secure as we can make it" version to the hundreds of us technical staff who wanted it. From RHEL, it was easy to embrace Fedora Core and Centos for experimental uses, since the same customization could be applied. It took LinuxCNC to get me comfortable with Ubuntu. I understand the reasoning behind your last sentence. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
