ralf.corsepius at rtems.org
Mon Apr 18 16:41:15 UTC 2011
On 04/18/2011 10:29 AM, Wolfram Wadepohl wrote:
> I think we are talking about different things. I'm absolutely unfamiliar
> with FreeType and it may be that Ralf is totally right relating to
> FreeType. I don't know. That is not the thing I wanted to point out.
Well, this was the key point this thread started with.
Executive summary: A user encountered a bug in an application, now he
wants to extend RTEMS with what he presumes to be a work-around to it.
I told him, the problem is not in RTEMS, it's within the application.
> Generally RTMES lacks in support of many widely available and also used
> features, if standard or not, to implement control systems, which are
> tightly integrated into SCADA. Especially in networking I reached the
> point to make a decision about the future: RTEMS or GNU/LINUX.
That's a completely different issue and has nothing to do with what I wrote.
The sad truth is that the RTEMS network stack is simply outdated, hardly
expandable and thus lacks many features newer networking stack have.
> It is not the matter of a simple definition. We must frequently
> implement 3rd party code into the system, mostly developed for Windows
> or GNU/LINUX sytems.
Except that RTEMS may not bring along certain the low-level
infrastructure some package may be based on, porting POSIX-compliant
packages (== many Linux packages) to RTEMS should not be much of a problem..
> Just as an example: I learned that the networking stack is an very old
> BSD relict and many RTEMS user would apreciate a current stack including
> But no one takes the effort to update to a current release. For a
> small to medium sized enterprise, like us, this project is also too big.
Well, what shall I say? FLOSS systems like RTEMS, also come at a price ;)
> What I want to point out is, that the community is currently not able to
> carry out this work.
Correct, community works "just happen".
Usually this means somebody will have to initiate the works, otherwise
it will never happen.
> When we are faced with IPv6 as a asolutely _must_
> _have_? In months, years, decades?
If you'd ask me: 5 years ago :)
> Not the decision about bits/wordsize.h is in my mind. Shall we stay with
> RTEMS or shall we move to GNU/LINUX. I'm convinced of RTEMS but it gets
> harder and harder to convince others (managagement, sales, customers).
No disagreement - As some people around here know, I am currently quite
critical on the way RTEMS evolves.
> And I do not know how RTEMS evolve, neither direction nor timeline.
Nobody knows - "FLOSS happens"
> this makes it difficult to get funds for development of RTEMS components.
I can relate, but - it may sound trivial - if you want something to
happen, in FLOSS ... do it yourselves (and contribute it back) or pay
somebody to do it :)
More information about the users