I'm not out to start any kind of OS war here, I'm simply curious
as to alternatives.
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp p...@phk.freebsd.dk wrote:
... which you can read more about in my paper from 2002:
http://phk.freebsd.dk/pubs/timecounter.pdf
Anyone know how
Bob Paddock wrote:
Anyone ever look at Minix-III (Minix-I was the progenitor to Linux)?
Seems like it would be easy to make a decent time server, on
embedded hardware with it. Past iterations of the Minix-III website
gave a watch as an example small embedded system it was meant to power.
Why
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Chuck Harris cfhar...@erols.com wrote:
Bob Paddock wrote:
Anyone ever look at Minix-III (Minix-I was the progenitor to Linux)?
Seems like it would be easy to make a decent time server, on
embedded hardware with it. Past iterations of the Minix-III website
Bob Paddock wrote:
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Chuck Harris cfhar...@erols.com wrote:
Bob Paddock wrote:
Anyone ever look at Minix-III (Minix-I was the progenitor to Linux)?
Seems like it would be easy to make a decent time server, on
embedded hardware with it. Past iterations of the
In message 4a0ebdee.2020...@erols.com, Chuck Harris writes:
A watch isn't exactly a challenge to an operating system.
Well, no.
But figuring out correct handling of time is a challenge for operating
system programmers.
I have no idea how the timing code is in minix3, but I do know
how much
Lasse Richard
Further to your discussions regarding interfacing the Jupiter TU60-D120.
There would seem to be a number of varieties of these units which one would
expect to find some common interface connections and software control, but I
gather this is not the case.
I am currently trying to
In message: bf689bbe0905160731he199751t1b9212a526ea2...@mail.gmail.com
Bob Paddock bob.padd...@gmail.com writes:
: On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Chuck Harris cfhar...@erols.com wrote:
: Bob Paddock wrote:
:
: Anyone ever look at Minix-III (Minix-I was the progenitor to Linux)?
:
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message 4a0ebdee.2020...@erols.com, Chuck Harris writes:
A watch isn't exactly a challenge to an operating system.
Well, no.
But figuring out correct handling of time is a challenge for operating
system programmers.
Very true...
I have no idea how the timing
On 5/16/09 8:04 AM, Chuck Harris cfhar...@erols.com wrote:
Bob Paddock wrote:
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Chuck Harris cfhar...@erols.com wrote:
Why do you think Minix-III would be a good candidate for a time server?
Minix-III is based on the microkernel approach of keeping
On 5/16/09 1:43 PM, Chuck Harris cfhar...@erols.com wrote:
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
I have no idea how the timing code is in minix3, but I do know
how much time it took me and subsequently Warner to get it right
and good in FreeBSD.
Given that minix was written by a CS professor who
In message 4a0f2581.7000...@erols.com, Chuck Harris writes:
I don't believe that will be happening in a message passing microkernel
(like minix) anytime soon... unless you build all of the timekeeping
software into the kernel, and then you are in the process of becoming
a monolithic kernel ;-)
I think there is more use of microkernels (eCos, RTEMS, Erlang, etc.) in the
embedded world. The environment is more constrained, so reducing the
footprint is useful.
There is also the new µC/OS-III (yes, three) that provides near zero
interrupt disable time. µC/OS-III has a number of internal
Lux, James P wrote:
I think there is more use of microkernels (eCos, RTEMS, Erlang, etc.) in the
embedded world. The environment is more constrained, so reducing the
footprint is useful.
That's just it, it doesn't reduce the footprint at all!
All it does is legislate that the kernel
Lux, James P wrote:
I don't believe that will be happening in a message passing microkernel
(like minix) anytime soon... unless you build all of the timekeeping
software into the kernel, and then you are in the process of becoming
a monolithic kernel ;-)
Or, do what I'm doing for a software
Anyone know how NetBSD stands in regard to time services?
From a couple of years ago...
Good, not fantastic.
It has the 20(?) year old kernel code from Dave Mills in the kernel sources.
You probably have to build your own kernel to get it.
It doesn't have anything newer than that.
No new
On 5/16/09 4:30 PM, Chuck Harris cfhar...@erols.com wrote:
Lux, James P wrote:
I think there is more use of microkernels (eCos, RTEMS, Erlang, etc.) in the
embedded world. The environment is more constrained, so reducing the
footprint is useful.
That's just it, it doesn't reduce the
On 5/16/09 4:32 PM, Chuck Harris cfhar...@erols.com wrote:
Lux, James P wrote:
I don't believe that will be happening in a message passing microkernel
(like minix) anytime soon... unless you build all of the timekeeping
software into the kernel, and then you are in the process of
[1] This is why I say that FreeBSD is a generation ahead, I have yet
to see any other operating system support PPS-API on hardware captured
signals.
This is one of the reasons why I was looking for a low-cost FPGA on PCI board
with some way to get a couple of external inputs.
You could
Lux, James P wrote:
You do the work in the kernel, or you do the work outside of
the kernel, but you still have to do the work, and that takes
code.
But lots of embedded applications don't need, e.g., a file system.
All they need is device drivers, a scheduler, and some sort of messaging
In message 20090517031525.292e7b...@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net, Hal Murr
ay writes:
This is one of the reasons why I was looking for a low-cost FPGA on PCI board
with some way to get a couple of external inputs.
Things get interesting if your hardware splits a 64 bit read into 2 32 bit
20 matches
Mail list logo
