[S.u.S.E. Linux] GNU
Both of you boys get extra credit! Actually I have no doubt that eventually the Hurd will be a fairly usable os, nowhere near the functionality of linux or freebsd. The staggering amount of development in the linux community is a phenomenon that won't be duplicated any time soon, but there are some other free unices that warrant some interest, albeit none are as feature-rich or host the wealth of apps that linux does. -- ==================================================================== Michael Lankton <A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org"><A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A">http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A</A>> ==================================================================== - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On 25-Jul-98 Michael Lankton wrote: It will eventually be usable, but will it matter? I can't see GNU developers pulling support for Linux because they have their own kernel. There's also freedows, or any of the message-passing OS variants that are a little more revolutionary... P.S. I didn't see the other messages before responding with mine! Really!
Both of you boys get extra credit! Actually I have no doubt that eventually the Hurd will be a fairly usable os, nowhere near the functionality of linux or freebsd. The staggering amount of development in the linux community is a phenomenon that won't be duplicated any time soon, but there are some other free unices that warrant some interest, albeit none are as feature-rich or host the wealth of apps that linux does.
--- jonathan@aracnet.net <A HREF="http://members.xoom.com/JMarkevich"><A HREF="http://members.xoom.com/JMarkevich</A">http://members.xoom.com/JMarkevich</A</A>> Blore's Razor: Given a choice between two theories, take the one which is funnier. - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
jonathan@aracnet.net wrote:
On 25-Jul-98 Michael Lankton wrote:
It will eventually be usable, but will it matter? I can't see GNU developers pulling support for Linux because they have their own kernel.
There's also freedows, or any of the message-passing OS variants that are a little more revolutionary...
If you want "revolutionary," take a GOOD gander at QNX!! 'Fastest micro-kernel, message passing, distributed processing OS for the Intel platform! You can imagine what task switches are for a good Pentium II, considering that the old version of QNX would task switch on a 20Mhz P-5 at OVER 20,000 a sec! Fred -- Fred A. Miller, Systems Administrator Cornell Univ. Press Services fmiller@lightlink.com fm@cupserv.org - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Yes, but QNX is an RTOS. You got to know what do RTOS gives you, before you commit on an RTOS. Kenneth Tan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ C. J. Kenneth Tan E-mail: cjtan@acm.org Telephone: 1-403-220-8038 cjtan@ieee.org 1-403-606-4257 URL: <A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc"><A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A">http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A</A>> Facsimile: 1-403-284-1980 "An engineer made programmer is one who attempts to solve a problem, A programmer made engineer is one who knows how to solve a problem." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Fred A. Miller wrote:
jonathan@aracnet.net wrote:
On 25-Jul-98 Michael Lankton wrote:
It will eventually be usable, but will it matter? I can't see GNU developers pulling support for Linux because they have their own kernel.
There's also freedows, or any of the message-passing OS variants that are a little more revolutionary...
If you want "revolutionary," take a GOOD gander at QNX!! 'Fastest micro-kernel, message passing, distributed processing OS for the Intel platform! You can imagine what task switches are for a good Pentium II, considering that the old version of QNX would task switch on a 20Mhz P-5 at OVER 20,000 a sec!
Fred
-- Fred A. Miller, Systems Administrator Cornell Univ. Press Services fmiller@lightlink.com fm@cupserv.org
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
It's 100% POSIX compliant, and there's VERY little UNIX code that can't be made to run on it. Now, I'm not advocating QNX or Linux....not the point I was making. QNX has a niche market, one where there's NO competition because of the real-time demands. Fred C. J. Kenneth Tan wrote:
Yes, but QNX is an RTOS. You got to know what do RTOS gives you, before you commit on an RTOS.
Kenneth Tan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ C. J. Kenneth Tan E-mail: cjtan@acm.org Telephone: 1-403-220-8038 cjtan@ieee.org 1-403-606-4257 URL: <A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc"><A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A">http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A</A>> Facsimile: 1-403-284-1980
"An engineer made programmer is one who attempts to solve a problem, A programmer made engineer is one who knows how to solve a problem." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Fred A. Miller wrote:
jonathan@aracnet.net wrote:
On 25-Jul-98 Michael Lankton wrote:
It will eventually be usable, but will it matter? I can't see GNU developers pulling support for Linux because they have their own kernel.
There's also freedows, or any of the message-passing OS variants that are a little more revolutionary...
If you want "revolutionary," take a GOOD gander at QNX!! 'Fastest micro-kernel, message passing, distributed processing OS for the Intel platform! You can imagine what task switches are for a good Pentium II, considering that the old version of QNX would task switch on a 20Mhz P-5 at OVER 20,000 a sec!
Fred
-- Fred A. Miller, Systems Administrator Cornell Univ. Press Services fmiller@lightlink.com fm@cupserv.org
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
-- Fred A. Miller, Systems Administrator Cornell Univ. Press Services fmiller@lightlink.com fm@cupserv.org - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Fred, Do you know how many RTOS are there in this world? All that I can say is that I don't have enough fingers and toes to count them all. In the book "Operating Systems Concepts" by Silberchatz and Galvin, you will find information on RTOS, when to use them, when not to use them. I don't think there are many home users who will have the type of work suitable for RTOS. Regards, Kenneth Tan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ C. J. Kenneth Tan E-mail: cjtan@acm.org Telephone: 1-403-220-8038 cjtan@ieee.org 1-403-606-4257 URL: <A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc"><A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A">http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A</A>> Facsimile: 1-403-284-1980 "An engineer made programmer is one who attempts to solve a problem, A programmer made engineer is one who knows how to solve a problem." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Fred A. Miller wrote:
It's 100% POSIX compliant, and there's VERY little UNIX code that can't be made to run on it. Now, I'm not advocating QNX or Linux....not the point I was making. QNX has a niche market, one where there's NO competition because of the real-time demands.
Fred
C. J. Kenneth Tan wrote:
Yes, but QNX is an RTOS. You got to know what do RTOS gives you, before you commit on an RTOS.
Kenneth Tan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ C. J. Kenneth Tan E-mail: cjtan@acm.org Telephone: 1-403-220-8038 cjtan@ieee.org 1-403-606-4257 URL: <A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc"><A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A">http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A</A>> Facsimile: 1-403-284-1980
"An engineer made programmer is one who attempts to solve a problem, A programmer made engineer is one who knows how to solve a problem." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Fred A. Miller wrote:
jonathan@aracnet.net wrote:
On 25-Jul-98 Michael Lankton wrote:
It will eventually be usable, but will it matter? I can't see GNU developers pulling support for Linux because they have their own kernel.
There's also freedows, or any of the message-passing OS variants that are a little more revolutionary...
If you want "revolutionary," take a GOOD gander at QNX!! 'Fastest micro-kernel, message passing, distributed processing OS for the Intel platform! You can imagine what task switches are for a good Pentium II, considering that the old version of QNX would task switch on a 20Mhz P-5 at OVER 20,000 a sec!
Fred
-- Fred A. Miller, Systems Administrator Cornell Univ. Press Services fmiller@lightlink.com fm@cupserv.org
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
-- Fred A. Miller, Systems Administrator Cornell Univ. Press Services fmiller@lightlink.com fm@cupserv.org - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
C. J. Kenneth Tan wrote:
Fred,
Do you know how many RTOS are there in this world? All that I can say is that I don't have enough fingers and toes to count them all.
In the book "Operating Systems Concepts" by Silberchatz and Galvin, you will find information on RTOS, when to use them, when not to use them. I don't think there are many home users who will have the type of work suitable for RTOS.
[snip] Ken, I didn't mention QNX to "pick a fight." I mentioned it because it does message passing and distributed processing BETTER than any other OS for an Intel system....period. There's a great deal to be learned from something that works that well. Certainly, most home users and small business don't need QNX, but that isn't the point, nor a discussion of RTOS OS's. Fred -- Fred A. Miller, Systems Administrator Cornell Univ. Press Services fmiller@lightlink.com fm@cupserv.org - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
C. J. Kenneth Tan wrote:
Fred,
Do you know how many RTOS are there in this world? All that I can say is that I don't have enough fingers and toes to count them all.
In the book "Operating Systems Concepts" by Silberchatz and Galvin, you will find information on RTOS, when to use them, when not to use them. I don't think there are many home users who will have the type of work suitable for RTOS.
Regards, Kenneth Tan
Kenneth, et al, What's the deal on this and Linux? I have been reading Randolph Bentson's _Inside Linux_. He discusses the fact that Linux is (was at the time of his writing) not a RTOS. Has this changed? Is it changing? There are a lot of questions I have about his book. I figure I should try to learn as much as I can before I begin cluttering the list with a bunch of questions, but since the issue came up. What d'ya know? Steve -- [<A HREF="http://counter.li.org"><A HREF="http://counter.li.org</A">http://counter.li.org</A</A>>] S.u.S.E. Linux, www.suse.com I Think, I think I am, Therefore I am, I think? - Graeme Edge of the Moody Blues - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Steve, The answer to that question is both yes and no. Yes in that most Linux kernels are not RTOS kernels. No in that there are Linux RT kernels -- see RT-Linux Project (<A HREF="http://luz.cs.nmt.edu/~rtlinux/"><A HREF="http://luz.cs.nmt.edu/~rtlinux/</A">http://luz.cs.nmt.edu/~rtlinux/</A</A>>) and the KU Real-Time Linux Project (<A HREF="http://hegel.ittc.ukans.edu/projects/kurt/"><A HREF="http://hegel.ittc.ukans.edu/projects/kurt/</A">http://hegel.ittc.ukans.edu/projects/kurt/</A</A>>). In the KU Real-Time Linux project page, there is a bit of description about RT systems. However, if you are interested in OSes, the best book both to read and for reference that I have seen is the "Dinosaur book". It's the book "Operating Systems Concepts" by Silberchatz and Galvin, which has dinosaurs on the cover. Regards, Kenneth Tan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ C. J. Kenneth Tan E-mail: cjtan@acm.org Telephone: 1-403-220-8038 cjtan@ieee.org 1-403-606-4257 URL: <A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc"><A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A">http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A</A>> Facsimile: 1-403-284-1980 "An engineer made programmer is one who attempts to solve a problem, A programmer made engineer is one who knows how to solve a problem." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Sun, 26 Jul 1998, Steven T. Hatton wrote:
C. J. Kenneth Tan wrote:
Fred,
Do you know how many RTOS are there in this world? All that I can say is that I don't have enough fingers and toes to count them all.
In the book "Operating Systems Concepts" by Silberchatz and Galvin, you will find information on RTOS, when to use them, when not to use them. I don't think there are many home users who will have the type of work suitable for RTOS.
Regards, Kenneth Tan
Kenneth, et al,
What's the deal on this and Linux? I have been reading Randolph Bentson's _Inside Linux_. He discusses the fact that Linux is (was at the time of his writing) not a RTOS. Has this changed? Is it changing? There are a lot of questions I have about his book. I figure I should try to learn as much as I can before I begin cluttering the list with a bunch of questions, but since the issue came up. What d'ya know?
Steve --
[<A HREF="http://counter.li.org"><A HREF="http://counter.li.org</A">http://counter.li.org</A</A>>] S.u.S.E. Linux, www.suse.com
I Think, I think I am, Therefore I am, I think? - Graeme Edge of the Moody Blues
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
C. J. Kenneth Tan wrote: In the KU Real-Time Linux project page, there is a bit of description
about RT systems. However, if you are interested in OSes, the best book both to read and for reference that I have seen is the "Dinosaur book". It's the book "Operating Systems Concepts" by Silberchatz and Galvin, which has dinosaurs on the cover.
Kenneth, Thanks for the feedback. I used the Dinosaur book for my OS class. Don't remember too much about the internals of RTOS's. I will Jump right in there and read it as soon as I am done with Bentson's book, and Ahuja's book in security, and all the Netscape documentation on security, and get my MCSE out of the way, and finish _Mathematica by Example_, and get this stupid News server running with certificate based authentication, and get the page written to create a pseudo DLS, and get this symbolic logic truth table generator written, and figure out why Vincent's problem with perl running under certificate based authentication, and find a good psychiatrist :-) Hey, what's the deal on there being multiple Linux kernels? When I see people talk about the Linux kernel they usually only specify a version. I had the feeling that there was an official Linux kernel that was blessed of by some grand authority. Can it be explained how the Linux kernel is maintained? Steve -- [<A HREF="http://counter.li.org"><A HREF="http://counter.li.org</A">http://counter.li.org</A</A>>] S.u.S.E. Linux, www.suse.com I Think, I think I am, Therefore I am, I think? - Graeme Edge of the Moody Blues - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
There are official kernels that have been regarded as stable enough to be used by the 'masses'. There are also kernels that are 'developmental' which have new features etc that aren't regarded as perfectly stable...developmental meaning just that. Mostly these are used by hackers and programmers etc...or simply someone curious who doesn't mind playing with fire. There's plenty of information on the web about the different kernels and what features and problems are being tested and supported. One site you might want to look at is <A HREF="http://www.linuxhq.com...you"><A HREF="http://www.linuxhq.com...you</A">http://www.linuxhq.com...you</A</A>> can also browse the kernel archives, though much of the chat might be meaningless to you depending... Have fun. Michael
Hey, what's the deal on there being multiple Linux kernels? When I see people talk about the Linux kernel they usually only specify a version. I had the feeling that there was an official Linux kernel that was blessed of by some grand authority. Can it be explained how the Linux kernel is maintained?
Steve --
[<A HREF="http://counter.li.org"><A HREF="http://counter.li.org</A">http://counter.li.org</A</A>>] S.u.S.E. Linux, www.suse.com
I Think, I think I am, Therefore I am, I think? - Graeme Edge of the Moody Blues
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
-M One is most dishonest towards one's God; he is not _permitted_ to sin. mail: mjohnson@pop3.aebc.com - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
I ran 2.1.111 all night last night. I have to imagine that 2.2.x is close, 2.1.111 was nice. Michael Johnson wrote:
There are official kernels that have been regarded as stable enough to be used by the 'masses'. There are also kernels that are 'developmental' which have new features etc that aren't regarded as perfectly stable...developmental meaning just that. Mostly these are used by hackers and programmers etc...or simply someone curious who doesn't mind playing with fire. There's plenty of information on the web about the different kernels and what features and problems are being tested and supported. One site you might want to look at is <A HREF="http://www.linuxhq.com...you"><A HREF="http://www.linuxhq.com...you</A">http://www.linuxhq.com...you</A</A>> can also browse the kernel archives, though much of the chat might be meaningless to you depending...
-- ==================================================================== Michael Lankton <A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org"><A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A">http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A</A>> ==================================================================== - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Yeh, um.. I think I was responding to the guy who was asking a kernel versions question... I haven't used 2.1.111.... yet. I might try it. I only fool with ones that offer features or items that are changes I'd be interested in. I guess I should get off my behind and check it out. I'm running on 'old one' (in developmental terms) that for the MOST part is not to misbehaved. On Sun, 26 Jul 1998, Michael Lankton wrote:
I ran 2.1.111 all night last night. I have to imagine that 2.2.x is close, 2.1.111 was nice.
Michael Johnson wrote:
There are official kernels that have been regarded as stable enough to be used by the 'masses'. There are also kernels that are 'developmental' which have new features etc that aren't regarded as perfectly stable...developmental meaning just that. Mostly these are used by hackers and programmers etc...or simply someone curious who doesn't mind playing with fire. There's plenty of information on the web about the different kernels and what features and problems are being tested and supported. One site you might want to look at is <A HREF="http://www.linuxhq.com...you"><A HREF="http://www.linuxhq.com...you</A">http://www.linuxhq.com...you</A</A>> can also browse the kernel archives, though much of the chat might be meaningless to you depending...
-- ==================================================================== Michael Lankton <A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org"><A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A">http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A</A>> ==================================================================== - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
-M One is most dishonest towards one's God; he is not _permitted_ to sin. mail: mjohnson@pop3.aebc.com - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On 25-Jul-98 Fred A. Miller wrote:
There's also freedows, or any of the message-passing OS variants that are a little more revolutionary...
If you want "revolutionary," take a GOOD gander at QNX!! 'Fastest micro-kernel, message passing, distributed processing OS for the Intel platform! You can imagine what task switches are for a good Pentium II, considering that the old version of QNX would task switch on a 20Mhz P-5 at OVER 20,000 a sec!
I don't know if I really want revolutionary... yet. I'll wait until it becomes a bit more, uh, mainstream. I would like to see a virtual machine (Bochs??) spread out over a distributed processing OS. It would be a single super machine and would benefit from out of the box apps on phenomenal hardware! --- jonathan@aracnet.net <A HREF="http://members.xoom.com/JMarkevich"><A HREF="http://members.xoom.com/JMarkevich</A">http://members.xoom.com/JMarkevich</A</A>> "You've got to have a gimmick if your band sucks." -- Gary Giddens - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
jonathan@aracnet.net wrote:
On 25-Jul-98 Fred A. Miller wrote:
There's also freedows, or any of the message-passing OS variants that are a little more revolutionary...
If you want "revolutionary," take a GOOD gander at QNX!! 'Fastest micro-kernel, message passing, distributed processing OS for the Intel platform! You can imagine what task switches are for a good Pentium II, considering that the old version of QNX would task switch on a 20Mhz P-5 at OVER 20,000 a sec!
I don't know if I really want revolutionary... yet. I'll wait until it becomes a bit more, uh, mainstream. I would like to see a virtual machine (Bochs??) spread out over a distributed processing OS. It would be a single super machine and would benefit from out of the box apps on phenomenal hardware!
QNX won't become mainstream, as the company has no interest in expanding outside of it's niche market. It's in VERY wide use anywhere real-time processing is crucial. Fred -- Fred A. Miller, Systems Administrator Cornell Univ. Press Services fmiller@lightlink.com fm@cupserv.org - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
participants (6)
-
cjtan＠acm.org -
fmiller＠lightlink.com -
hattons＠CPKWEBSER5.ncr.disa.mil -
hekate＠intergate.bc.ca -
jonathan＠aracnet.net -
satan3＠home.com