Please, don't neglect our tireless efforts to sacrifice babies as well...
} Because they are not a "real" company, just a couple of people hoping to
} reap dot-com profits from a patent based on ancient prior art. Do not
} confuse them with any of the for-profit RT Linux outfits with real
}
We did attend. Rather, I did.
} Why doesn't FSMLabs attend ESCs to make their realtime variant of Linux
} more visible?
-- [rtl] ---
To unsubscribe:
echo "unsubscribe rtl" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR
echo "unsubscribe rtl Your_email" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
For more information on Real-Time
The discerning audience pays no heed to your specious, dangerous patent
claims.
Do you yet have a coherent statement regarding your alledged patent(s),
the preponderance of prior art, and whether RTAI is within the scope of
your patent?
:-(
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We're
Because they are not a "real" company, just a couple of people hoping to
reap dot-com profits from a patent based on ancient prior art. Do not
confuse them with any of the for-profit RT Linux outfits with real
products, or any of the GPL patriots that are working on real-time
support. All they
Dear and Fellow Engineers
I received an invitation to give a lecture on RTLinux (i.e to support why I
recommend the use of RTLinux).
Though there are common sense like free royalty, availability of source
code already in CD-ROM or at RTLinux related web site. But, what I really
want to
On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 01:36:59AM -0400, Peter Cavender wrote:
Because they are not a "real" company, just a couple of people hoping to
reap dot-com profits from a patent based on ancient prior art. Do not
confuse them with any of the for-profit RT Linux outfits with real
products, or any
On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 01:25:29AM -0400, Robert Warner wrote:
I keep getting attachments of OGJAFOGx.exe from [EMAIL PROTECTED] I
believe this to be a virus (haven't checked it and do not plan on doing
so). Why would I (we) be continuing to receive this junk. I have all the
previous
You may want to complicate things by considering RTAI... ;-)
www.rtai.org
- Original Message -
From: "Mukaila olundegun" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Real Time Linux" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 8:40 AM
Subject: [rtl] Why RTLinux?
Dear and Fellow Engineers
I received
Hi,
I was wandering if anyone had a brief description of the rt_task_struct
variables in rtai_sched.h. There is absolutly no comments in this file.
Futhermore, what's the difference between the rt_schedule() and
rt_timer_handler() functions.
Thanks.
Alex
Alex Plouznikoff wrote:
Hi,
I was wandering if anyone had a brief description of the rt_task_struct
variables in rtai_sched.h. There is absolutly no comments in this file.
Thats not true, there are atleast 5 lines of comments ;-)
I think the idea is that you use the (well documented) API
Hello all:
I'm trying to make DSLib v2 generate
adecuatedsystem calls depending on it beingLinux, RTLinux, or RTAI.
I'm looking in the Linux threads functions and I don't see any equivalent to
pthread_make_periodic_np and pthread_suspend_np. Is there any?. If not, how can
I performsuch
Gang,
I recall a few weeks back hearing about some black listed video
cards due to driver problems in X11R4 (and possibly other versions). As I
am about to buy a new laptop, I just want to check to see if the one I am
planning to purchase will have this problem.
I am looking at
On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 09:22:14PM +0200, Ivan Martinez wrote:
Hello all:
I'm trying to make DSLib v2 generate adecuated system calls depending on it being
Linux, RTLinux, or RTAI. I'm looking in the Linux threads functions and I don't see
any equivalent to pthread_make_periodic_np and
Hi,
I'm trying to understand the RTAI scheduler (rt_schedule()). Could anyone help
?
RT_TASK *task, *new_task;
RTIME intr_time, now;
int prio, delay, preempt;
task = new_task = rt_linux_task;
// SETTING DEFAULT PRIORITY TO LINUX PRIORITY ?
prio = RT_LINUX_PRIORITY;
//ONESHOT mode
if
David Schleef schrieb:
It can be duplicated using something similar to the attached
file.
select() is not bad, but you can't guarantee a stable
period (means a delay is propagated to the following
periods).
For this reason, i prefer pthread_cond_timedwait()
(see file attached).
Suspending
I've come to like pthread_cond_wait, although I admit that I found it
disgusting until recently -- when I wrote some applications where it
was quite pleasant.
On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 02:43:03AM +0200, Bernhard Kuhn wrote:
David Schleef schrieb:
It can be duplicated using something similar
16 matches
Mail list logo
