Zdenek Kabelac wrote:
> "Raymond Y. Lillard" wrote:
> > I find RTL very attractive for all of the obvious reasons, but for
> > my comfort I need to see two things.
> >
> > 1. Certainity (as best as can be had) that Linux portion of the
> > OS code contains no suprises. In the Linux development model
> > the opportunity to mess up is non-trivial. This means to me
> > that RTL should not be chasing the latest offerings from Linus
> > and company, but rather focus on more deliberate changes.
>
> On the opposite side, I always like to run the latest kernel - there
> is usually smaller amount of bugs and new features and new supported
> hardware.
> So my advice is to concern on the latest kernels. I would like to
> see the RT-Linux fully working with 2.2 linux.
>
> > Toward that end I would like to see as few releases as is
> > consistant with bug fixing. Let the improvements (new features)
> > come in larger chunks.
>
> Linux is not commercial product and I don't want to wait 3/4 of
> the year for another 'service pack' to fix some stupid hole
> in the system - thats simply the difference between the free-open-source
> unix OS and closed commercial - thus I would be in the same situation
> as you are by using such system.
I understand your viewpoint and clearly the present development model
serves your needs well. I am not proposing that the present development
model be stopped and the code become more closed or stagnate. I am
proposing that a more stable development model be placed on top of the
existing efforts, in effect the present layer would feed a more stable
one. The current rock-and-roll that exists must continue, but versions
of RTL that are offered to heavy industrial users needs to be tamed.
My experience is largely in the semiconductor process industry where
a single cassette of wafers, in the later stages of processing, is often
worth over half a million dollars US. A software malfunction can destroy
that in the blink of an eye.
I doubt you have the faintest clue as to what is required to qualify a
tool for a process line at Intel. While I will not discuss specifics,
to just say that it is rigorous and data driven is an understatement.
Change control at successful chip manufacturing companies is not just
a business practice, it is a religion.
I do not wish to sound condescending. I understand your perspective
and hope you will try to understand mine. I would like to see
RT-Linux accepted in heavy industry and am exposing issues that
impede that goal. Then again, maybe we don't share this goal.
Regards,
Ray
--- [rtl] ---
To unsubscribe:
echo "unsubscribe rtl" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR
echo "unsubscribe rtl <Your_email>" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----
For more information on Real-Time Linux see:
http://www.rtlinux.org/~rtlinux/
