I've used HardHat in lab systems (Ziatech Ketris, sweet boxes) when I
was at Rainfinity. From an admin/hack perspective, it feels like RedHat
with some kernel patches. It was a pleasure to work with compared to a
regular embedded system, but I doubt it would run nicely on a 486/33.
--
Jack Coates
Monkeynoodle: It's what's for dinner!
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
> In light of my recent decision to abandon waiting for Butterfly, I am taking
> a long, hard look at working with Monta-Vista's Hard-Hat linux. I think
> this would make an excellent base distribution for the next generation of
> internet appliance releases.
>
> Of course, the proof is in the pudding (or so they say), so I'm downloading
> their (free) Journeyman release to play with. I've also e-mailed the
> HardHat linux folks, to see if they have any interest in a project like LEAF
> using their distribution. While I don't think we currently need sponsership
> from Monta-Vista, an alliance (or similar) might be nice. It would at least
> be good to know things like if they plan on keeping a free development
> platform available, be informed of major upcoming changes to the
> distribution ahead of time, and similar.
>
> Another benefit of using something like HardHat is multi-processor support.
> This will mean absolutely nothing to 99.999% of our users, but several folks
> are embedding LRP into 'black boxes' which may or may not run an Intel
> architecture CPU. I personally would LOVE to play with something like
> HardHat on the new IBM NPe405 CPU with 4 built-in 10/100 ethernet ports and
> multiple T1/E1 support. That would make a pretty cool LEAF platform...
>
> NOTE: I'm still very open to suggestions on what to use as the base of the
> next generation of LRP like functionality. I'm mainly looking at starting
> with an existing distribution because 'out of the box' you get a working
> cross-compile environment (no more dedicated Debian Slink boxes just to
> compile an application or two), and much of the software will be
> pre-packaged. While the pre-packaged stuff will likely be in RPM format, it
> should be possible to easily convert the RPM's to a tar.gz file or something
> else shell-scripts can deal with. A lot of the hard work (that requires
> maintainence and debugging) goes into making sure the packages all work well
> together...we should be able to leverage this work from a mainstream
> distribution and speed our "time to solution". I really don't want to try
> to create or maintain a complete, from the ground up distribution...it seems
> like too much duplication of existing work.
>
> Thoughts/commments welcome, as always
>
> Charles Steinkuehler
> http://lrp.steinkuehler.net
> http://c0wz.steinkuehler.net (lrp.c0wz.com mirror)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leaf-devel mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
