2010/7/25 Dave <e...@dc9.tzo.com>: > On 7/24/2010 5:10 AM, Andy Pugh wrote: >> On 24 July 2010 06:48, Sebastian Kuzminsky<s...@highlab.com> wrote: >> >> >>> We don't have a reliable realtime kernel yet for Lucid. >>> >> What is unreliable about the experimental kernel? As in, does it not >> work reliably, or does it not reliably work? >> >> > Mozmck's kernel works fine on Intel based dual core motherboards, the > Intel 330 based boards and D510 boards. I have also run it with > success on a Celeron dual core CPU which was a derivative of the Core2 > Duo family, so I suspect the Core2 Duo CPUs work fine > with it as well.
Yes, one of my PCs is a D510 board, the other board is some VIA chipset with AMD Athlon 2200 CPU. And it worked great on that machine. So I have a question: Is it possible for EMC developers to publish EMC packages for Lucid with a note about the compatibility of current RTAI kernel with different CPUs and let RTAI developers sort that out? As I understand, then there are overall compatibility issues of Lucid RTAI kernel with certain CPUs, not EMC compatibility problem with the same CPUs. I [and, hopefully, other readers of this mailing list] believe that using quad-core PC for a CNC tool with EMC is a waste of resources, because almost any single-core machine with 1Ghz cpu clock is capable of handling EMC, not to mention dual-core machines. So I think that EMC packages for Lucid with skipped support for quad-core machines still will be beneficial for vast majority of EMC users (unfortunately that is my personal opinion which is not supported with any numbers, statistics etc.). Viesturs ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
