Personally I would like the linuxcnc.deb called linuxcnc-rtai.deb. This distinguishes it from RT-Linux, Xen, Preempt-RT, and if we ever played with the Styx-on-a-Brick <http://doc.cat-v.org/inferno/4th_edition/styx-on-a-brick/> 9P protocol, we would have something yet again. There it also the wineing to do a Win* version again (maybe WinRT?)... So, I would like to think ahead and choose a naming convention that is unambiguous and expansible. But that is only my opinion...
EBo -- On Oct 23 2014 10:49 PM, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote: > Packaging of LinuxCNC should probaly change some for 2.7. > > > In 2.6 and earlier we shipped two debian packages (plus their > corresponding -dev packages, and the -doc packages): > > linuxcnc.deb (configure --with-realtime=$RTAI) > linuxcnc-sim.deb (configure --enable-simulator) > > The 2.6 RTAI deb can only run with the RTAI kernel and provides > realtime > scheduling and hardware access. The 2.6 sim deb can run with any > kernel > and does not provide any realtime scheduling or hardware access. > > > In 2.7 we'll want to ship two packages: > something.deb (configure --with-realtime=$RTAI) > somethingelse.deb (config --with-realtime=uspace) > > The 2.7 RTAI deb is just like before, it runs under RTAI with > realtime > scheduling and hardware access. I think this linuxcnc-for-rtai > package > should still be called linuxcnc.deb, although an argument could be > made > for "linuxcnc-rtai.deb". > > The uspace deb can run under any kernel. It uses the POSIX realtime > scheduler (which provides good realtime performance under the > RT-Preempt > kernel and no-so-great realtime performance under the vanilla kernel) > and iopl for hardware access. > > I think this linuxcnc-for-posix-realtime package should *not* be > called > "linuxcnc-sim", since it is not limited to simulation like the 2.6 > linuxcnc-sim was. The uspace package is fully capable of realtime > machine control, if you run it under the right kernel (rt-preempt), > so > "sim" is a misnomer. > > It should probably be called "linuxcnc-uspace.deb", and per the > Debian > Policy Manual[0] it should Provide:, Conflict:, and Replace: > linuxcnc-sim. > > 0: > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s7.6.2 > > > Thoughts/comments? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
