f



All RTOS (linux Based ) Other than RT-Linux

Hi all, I want to know, there are any REAL TIME OPERATING
systems( RTOS) which should have total linux compatible other than RT-
Linux.

And are there any free Real time Operating systems ( Linux Based ) is
available on the Internet.

Please provide some information regarding this issue.

0
mahi
7/24/2007 6:54:50 AM
comp.os.linux.setup 9104 articles. 1 followers. Post Follow

16 Replies
887 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 43

mahi wrote:
> Hi all, I want to know, there are any REAL TIME OPERATING
> systems( RTOS) which should have total linux compatible other than RT-
> Linux.
> 
> And are there any free Real time Operating systems ( Linux Based ) is
> available on the Internet.
> 
> Please provide some information regarding this issue.
> 
What do you understand by:

Real time?
Linux compatible?
0
The
7/24/2007 8:17:25 AM
mahi wrote:
> Hi all, I want to know, there are any REAL TIME OPERATING
> systems( RTOS) which should have total linux compatible other than RT-
> Linux.
> 
> And are there any free Real time Operating systems ( Linux Based ) is
> available on the Internet.
> 
> Please provide some information regarding this issue.

	I have read that the kernel is interrupt driven rather than schedule driven. If 
that is what you mean, all linuxes are real time.

-- 
The purpose of peace talks between Palestine and Israel is to prevent
Palestine from ever being free of the Israel occupation.
	-- The Iron Webmaster, 3842
  nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
  commentary http://www.giwersworld.org/opinion/running.phtml a5
0
Matt
7/25/2007 2:51:14 AM
Matt Giwer wrote:
> mahi wrote:
>> Hi all, I want to know, there are any REAL TIME OPERATING
>> systems( RTOS) which should have total linux compatible other than RT-
>> Linux.
>>
>> And are there any free Real time Operating systems ( Linux Based ) is
>> available on the Internet.
>>
>> Please provide some information regarding this issue.
> 
>     I have read that the kernel is interrupt driven rather than schedule 
> driven. If that is what you mean, all linuxes are real time.
> 
Thats not generally enough for many peoples definitions, which is that 
the time to respond to an (external) interrupt is fast, un blockable, 
and well defined.


If you think of how many ways to stop your 'lunix' responding to a 
keyboard interrupt exist, you will get my drift.

Most RTOSes are very lightweight and very carefully controlled in terms 
of response time to interrupts.
0
The
7/25/2007 8:44:19 AM
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>> mahi wrote:
>>> Hi all, I want to know, there are any REAL TIME OPERATING
>>> systems( RTOS) which should have total linux compatible other than RT-
>>> Linux.
>>> And are there any free Real time Operating systems ( Linux Based ) is
>>> available on the Internet.
>>> Please provide some information regarding this issue.
>>     I have read that the kernel is interrupt driven rather than 
>> schedule driven. If that is what you mean, all linuxes are real time.

> Thats not generally enough for many peoples definitions, which is that 
> the time to respond to an (external) interrupt is fast, un blockable, 
> and well defined.

	I realize there are many definitions. However what you suggest is what "nice" 
is for. Having a real time OS and tailoring it are two different matters.

> If you think of how many ways to stop your 'lunix' responding to a 
> keyboard interrupt exist, you will get my drift.

	Change the BIOS to no keyboard? Or something like that. The keyboard is not a 
linux function. It only  reads the BIOS.

> Most RTOSes are very lightweight and very carefully controlled in terms 
> of response time to interrupts.

	I have never become involved in tailoring a OS compile to single applications. 
I have no idea how to do it. I have READ killing all the unneeded material is 
possible.

-- 
Republicans are more interested in protecting the president than the troops.
	-- The Iron Webmaster, 3839
  nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
  flying saucers http://www.giwersworld.org/flyingsa.html a2
0
Matt
7/25/2007 11:07:37 AM
Matt Giwer wrote:

>> Hi all, I want to know, there are any REAL TIME OPERATING
>> systems( RTOS) which should have total linux compatible other than RT-
>> Linux.
>>
>> And are there any free Real time Operating systems ( Linux Based ) is
>> available on the Internet.
>>
>> Please provide some information regarding this issue.
> 
> 
>     I have read that the kernel is interrupt driven rather than schedule 
> driven. If that is what you mean, all linuxes are real time.

Real time systems typically guarantee some timing (interrupt 
latency...), so that processes can react on events in a timely manner. 
Furthermore the response on events has time constraints, i.e. a process 
must lower its priority, after doing the time critical event handling. 
This requires that *all* system processes behave accordingly, what's not 
normally the case in an preemptive multitasking system. A related 
requirement are memory-resident event handlers, separated somehow from 
the less critical swappable parts of an process.

IMO these requirements cannot be satisfied with the public Linux code, 
and also cannot be introduced by simple patches to the kernel etc. sources.

Some approaches make the Linux kernel simply an process, running under 
control of an new RT kernel. But then RT processes will have to 
communicate and cooperate with the RT kernel, so that they run more in 
parallel to the Linux kernel, instead of controlled by the Linux kernel. 
IMO it then is inevitable to split RT applications into an RT process, 
running under control of the RT kernel, and an non-RT process, running 
under control of the Linux kernel. One also might see the RT part as 
kind of a device or driver, interacting with the remaining part of the 
application.

IMO it will be simpler to use some available RT system, and make it's 
ABI so Linux-compatible, that Linux applications can be installed into 
such a system. But then it might be easier to install a veritable Linux 
into a VM, hosted by the RT OS. See also: The Xen Project.

DoDi
0
Hans
7/25/2007 12:38:56 PM
Matt Giwer wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>> mahi wrote:
>>>> Hi all, I want to know, there are any REAL TIME OPERATING
>>>> systems( RTOS) which should have total linux compatible other than RT-
>>>> Linux.
>>>> And are there any free Real time Operating systems ( Linux Based ) is
>>>> available on the Internet.
>>>> Please provide some information regarding this issue.
>>>     I have read that the kernel is interrupt driven rather than 
>>> schedule driven. If that is what you mean, all linuxes are real time.
> 
>> Thats not generally enough for many peoples definitions, which is that 
>> the time to respond to an (external) interrupt is fast, un blockable, 
>> and well defined.
> 
>     I realize there are many definitions. However what you suggest is 
> what "nice" is for. Having a real time OS and tailoring it are two 
> different matters.
> 

With respect, it isn't.

>> If you think of how many ways to stop your 'lunix' responding to a 
>> keyboard interrupt exist, you will get my drift.
> 
>     Change the BIOS to no keyboard? Or something like that. The keyboard 
> is not a linux function. It only  reads the BIOS.
> 

Shows how little you know..most ROM BIOSES are TOTALLY bypassed by 
linux. Their sole function is to get the OS in place with some form of 
basic keyboard and screen control. In case intervention is needed.

After that the interrupt routines are installed by the kernel for pretty 
much everything.


>> Most RTOSes are very lightweight and very carefully controlled in 
>> terms of response time to interrupts.
> 
>     I have never become involved in tailoring a OS compile to single 
> applications. I have no idea how to do it. I have READ killing all the 
> unneeded material is possible.
> 

Well it depends on what application you want to run..if its simple 
enough you probably wouldn't bother with an OS at all. Or you would 
write your own...it becomes less a question of what you remove that what 
you decide to include..you wouldn't need multiuser capabilities 
normally, though you might leave in a hierarchy of task priorities..you 
might not even need a strict multitasking ability. If the program does 
just one thing, that is processing some real time event and turning it 
into an output, you can leave the processor in either a halt state, or 
running in a null loop till an interrupt comes along.

Linux is a multiuser, multitasking general OS. Its not designed for real 
time work. People use it and work round that by stripping it down and 
having enough processor speed to cope with its deficiencies, and hoping 
no bug or unforeseen events slow it or crash it..but is not the best way 
to crack a real real-time application.

It's easier to buy in a proper RTOS with libc support and compile linux 
stuff to that..if you want REAL millisecond response times.

The problem with Linux as its stands is that lots of stuff inside the 
kernel may wait indeterminate times with most or all interrupts 
disabled, waiting for a peripheral to respond. Sure mostly this is 
engineered out for common cases: but there's plenty pf times that a 
buggy bit of code can freeze out the rest of the machine by hogging 
cycles or calling into the kernel to do something that doesn't complete 
in a timely fashion. Where defined response times are a matter of life 
and death - like in avionics, you will not find Linux.






0
The
7/26/2007 11:51:08 AM
Matt Giwer wrote:

>> Thats not generally enough for many peoples definitions, which is that
>> the time to respond to an (external) interrupt is fast, un blockable,
>> and well defined.
> 
> I realize there are many definitions. However what you suggest is what
> "nice" is for. Having a real time OS and tailoring it are two different
> matters.

Actually, "nice" is for batch jobs vs interactive ones.  Has nothing to do
with interrupts.

However, there are real-time extensions to Unix/Linux which allow fixed
priorities, no swapping, task activation/resumption on specified interrupts,
etc..  While not enough for "hard" real time with rapid responses, the
extensions are more than adequate for the average process control or SCADA
system.  One of the projects I was involved in ran an aluminum smelter SCADA
system.  It's been installed in several smelters around the world.  Works
fine.

Use of the extensions does take a little getting used to.  For example, to run
a task every 5 milliseconds one does not exit and request reactivation in the
said 5 milliseconds.  Instead, request the time when activated and at the end
of each iteration request reactivation or resumption in 5 milliseconds minus
however long the current iteration took.

-- 
It's turtles, all the way down.
0
Larry
7/26/2007 11:34:07 PM
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> Matt Giwer wrote:
....
>>     Change the BIOS to no keyboard? Or something like that. The 
>> keyboard is not a linux function. It only  reads the BIOS.

> Shows how little you know..most ROM BIOSES are TOTALLY bypassed by 
> linux. Their sole function is to get the OS in place with some form of 
> basic keyboard and screen control. In case intervention is needed.

	I guess I have been confused by the necessity to have the BIOS reflect new 
hardware before linux notices it is there.

-- 
As pf July 2007, the Iraq war is costing the same as three nuclear aircraft
carriers every month. Never again question the cost of a carrier.
	-- The Iron Webmaster, 3841
  nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
  Israel says no extermination 
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo3/holo-survivors.phtml a13
0
Matt
7/28/2007 2:34:19 AM
Matt Giwer wrote:

> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> Matt Giwer wrote:
> ...
>>>     Change the BIOS to no keyboard? Or something like that. The
>>> keyboard is not a linux function. It only  reads the BIOS.
> 
>> Shows how little you know..most ROM BIOSES are TOTALLY bypassed by
>> linux. Their sole function is to get the OS in place with some form of
>> basic keyboard and screen control. In case intervention is needed.
> 
> I guess I have been confused by the necessity to have the BIOS reflect new
> hardware before linux notices it is there.
> 

And right here you made the next error
-- 
Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product.

0
Peter
8/5/2007 7:08:05 AM
Peter K=F6hlmann wrote:
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>> ...
>>>>     Change the BIOS to no keyboard? Or something like that. The
>>>> keyboard is not a linux function. It only  reads the BIOS.
>>> Shows how little you know..most ROM BIOSES are TOTALLY bypassed by
>>> linux. Their sole function is to get the OS in place with some form o=
f
>>> basic keyboard and screen control. In case intervention is needed.
>> I guess I have been confused by the necessity to have the BIOS reflect=
 new
>> hardware before linux notices it is there.

> And right here you made the next error

	Odd that it is required. Perhaps you could take the time to explain.

--=20
Hodie postridie Nonas Augustas MMVII est
      -- The Ferric Webceasar
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
  Old Testament http://www.giwersworld.org/bible/ot.phtml a6

0
Matt
8/6/2007 4:51:30 AM
Matt Giwer wrote:
> Peter K�hlmann wrote:
>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>> ...
>>>>>     Change the BIOS to no keyboard? Or something like that. The
>>>>> keyboard is not a linux function. It only  reads the BIOS.
>>>> Shows how little you know..most ROM BIOSES are TOTALLY bypassed by
>>>> linux. Their sole function is to get the OS in place with some form of
>>>> basic keyboard and screen control. In case intervention is needed.
>>> I guess I have been confused by the necessity to have the BIOS 
>>> reflect new
>>> hardware before linux notices it is there.
> 
>> And right here you made the next error
> 
>     Odd that it is required. Perhaps you could take the time to explain.
> 

Th BIOS merely provide a set of routines that are hopefully

- enough to get the machine to boot something else and
- MAY be used by whatever else runs to access the hardware, but its only 
MAY.

In fact most OS'es these days simply use the BIOS to bootstrap the boot 
loader, and maybe access the boot disk: Once the OS is loaded it is 
completely bypassed.

So in reality, all the BIOS dos in most systems is run the disk system 
and select a boot drive, and provide a minimal amount of screen/keyboard 
stuff for boot diagnostics.
0
The
8/6/2007 10:17:08 AM
The Natural Philosopher writes:
> In fact most OS'es these days simply use the BIOS to bootstrap the boot
> loader, and maybe access the boot disk

Linux itself does not use the BIOS at all.  All bootloaders use it, but the
bootloader is not part of the OS.

> Once the OS is loaded it is completely bypassed.

Correct, but there may be hardware that is initialized by the BIOS.
-- 
John Hasler 
john@dhh.gt.org
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA
0
John
8/6/2007 12:46:08 PM
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>> Peter K=F6hlmann wrote:
>>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>>>     Change the BIOS to no keyboard? Or something like that. The
>>>>>> keyboard is not a linux function. It only  reads the BIOS.
>>>>> Shows how little you know..most ROM BIOSES are TOTALLY bypassed by
>>>>> linux. Their sole function is to get the OS in place with some form=
 of
>>>>> basic keyboard and screen control. In case intervention is needed.
>>>> I guess I have been confused by the necessity to have the BIOS=20
>>>> reflect new
>>>> hardware before linux notices it is there.
>>> And right here you made the next error
>>     Odd that it is required. Perhaps you could take the time to explai=
n.

> Th BIOS merely provide a set of routines that are hopefully

> - enough to get the machine to boot something else and
> - MAY be used by whatever else runs to access the hardware, but its onl=
y=20
> MAY.

> In fact most OS'es these days simply use the BIOS to bootstrap the boot=
=20
> loader, and maybe access the boot disk: Once the OS is loaded it is=20
> completely bypassed.

> So in reality, all the BIOS dos in most systems is run the disk system =

> and select a boot drive, and provide a minimal amount of screen/keyboar=
d=20
> stuff for boot diagnostics.

	What started this was my statement that the keypresses are found by acce=
ssing=20
BIOS.

	However my experience is that all hardware changes have to be registered=
 in=20
BIOS before they are recognized by the OS, linux or otherwise. I can see =
how=20
once in BIOS the OS knows what to "look" for and then deal with it.

	Not having actually followed the motherboard traces from the keyboard pl=
ug to=20
see where they lead I cannot swear the BIOS is the only place where an OS=
 can=20
get the keypresses. However if the BIOS is not needed what his the physic=
al=20
access point the linux uses to get the keypress data?

--=20
Al Qaeda is back to its pre-911 strength of 300. I am so frightened I can=

only laugh to relieve the anxiety. 300 is the highest US government estim=
ate
of their numbers ever made public.
	-- The Iron Webmaaster, 3831
  nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
  commentary http://www.giwersworld.org/opinion/running.phtml a5

0
Matt
8/7/2007 5:10:30 AM
Matt Giwer wrote:

>     Not having actually followed the motherboard traces from the 
> keyboard plug to see where they lead I cannot swear the BIOS is the only 
> place where an OS can get the keypresses. However if the BIOS is not 
> needed what his the physical access point the linux uses to get the 
> keypress data?

It depends on the physical device. A PS/2 keyboard is connected to 
different hardware, and is served by a different handler, than is e.g. a 
wireless USB keyboard. When the OS installs drivers, for all physical 
devices, the drivers return the logical device type, e.g. display, HD. 
On universal adapters, like SCSI or USB, every connected device can be 
of an different type. The OS will send (or receive) requests to logical 
devices, which are translated by the handler into commands to the 
physical device.

DoDi
0
Hans
8/7/2007 9:48:13 AM
Matt Giwer wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>> Peter K�hlmann wrote:
>>>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>     Change the BIOS to no keyboard? Or something like that. The
>>>>>>> keyboard is not a linux function. It only  reads the BIOS.
>>>>>> Shows how little you know..most ROM BIOSES are TOTALLY bypassed by
>>>>>> linux. Their sole function is to get the OS in place with some 
>>>>>> form of
>>>>>> basic keyboard and screen control. In case intervention is needed.
>>>>> I guess I have been confused by the necessity to have the BIOS 
>>>>> reflect new
>>>>> hardware before linux notices it is there.
>>>> And right here you made the next error
>>>     Odd that it is required. Perhaps you could take the time to explain.
> 
>> Th BIOS merely provide a set of routines that are hopefully
> 
>> - enough to get the machine to boot something else and
>> - MAY be used by whatever else runs to access the hardware, but its 
>> only MAY.
> 
>> In fact most OS'es these days simply use the BIOS to bootstrap the 
>> boot loader, and maybe access the boot disk: Once the OS is loaded it 
>> is completely bypassed.
> 
>> So in reality, all the BIOS dos in most systems is run the disk system 
>> and select a boot drive, and provide a minimal amount of 
>> screen/keyboard stuff for boot diagnostics.
> 
>     What started this was my statement that the keypresses are found by 
> accessing BIOS.
> 
>     However my experience is that all hardware changes have to be 
> registered in BIOS before they are recognized by the OS, linux or 
> otherwise. I can see how once in BIOS the OS knows what to "look" for 
> and then deal with it.
> 
>     Not having actually followed the motherboard traces from the 
> keyboard plug to see where they lead I cannot swear the BIOS is the only 
> place where an OS can get the keypresses. However if the BIOS is not 
> needed what his the physical access point the linux uses to get the 
> keypress data?
> 

Interrupt off the hardware controller that services the keyboard.

The vectors for these are held in RAM. They can be changed. You can 
install your own. Most systems do. IIRC the first thing a bios will do 
on boot is set these vectors up. Until it does the keyboard won;t work. 
As soon as the OS kernel comes in, it will rewrite some or all of them 
to point to its handlers.

What happens is that - say - a keypress is recogniosed by the keyboard 
peripheral chip. A small computer in its own right, whose job is to wait 
for keypresses and maybe mouse movements and the like. These days its 
probably the generic USB controller, and every time a block of data 
comes in,depending on how its programmed, it will either raise an 
interrupt line on every byte, or when its small internal buffer is full.

The interrupt lines go into another small piece of hardware - the 
interrupt controller - and that will register which peripheral has 
raised the interrupt, and pass a general interrupt along to the 
processsor, which will stop, shove its program counter in the stack, 
read the interrupt NUMBER from teh interrupt controller, and jump 
immdiately to the contents of teh NUMBERE'th row of a table held in 
(low?) RAM That might at one time have been pointing at BIOS ROM, but 
fter te OS has does its laoding, itr won;t be. It will point to the USB 
interrupt service routine.

What THAT des is read te USB device directly, and find out something 
about the device that caused the USB port to wake up. Decide its a 
keyboard key press and jump to a specific bit of code that will reda 
that byte of data, put it in a buffer, raise a flag to say 'keyboard 
data available' and then probabably call the scheduling part of the 
multitasker to tell it to resume any threads that are halted pending 
keyboard input. Then it will issue a return from interrupt and teh 
processor will resume what it was doing by popping its program cunter 
from the stack.

Now the next time the scheduler suspends the thread the  processor was 
executing, it will immediately resume whatever task(s) was/were waiting 
for keyboard input. In whatever priority they were listed. Example: Some 
keys are flagged as super keys' and may be examined and acted on by the 
low level daemons..a break key for example will be examined by low level 
software t see if it means it needs to do Something Awful.  So every 
process that MIGHT want to know what key is pressed or what button is 
clicked must examine all the inputs, and if they decide its not for 
them, leave it there and go back to sleep. Finally someone - say the 
application focus - gets the keystroke and says 'aha' I must type an A 
on the application..AND REMOVE IT FROM THE BUFFER. At this point its 
gone, No other application will get it, and if there are other lower 
priority task that might be waiting for it, they will either find no 
data, or won't even be woken up. If the keyboard interface is written 
well, it will call the scheduler when the command 'empty the buffer' is 
received and clear all wakeup flags from threads waiting for keyboard input.

Don;'t hold me to the exact details of this, buts thats broadly how it 
happened the last time I wrote this sort of stuff, which was 20 years 
ago on an 8086...:-)

The fundamental thing is that a BIOS ONLY has to carry enough code to 
boot the OS. Essentially that means

- set up a basic screen and keyboard and disk driver kernel
- read the NVRAM to find out where to boot from, and what type of built 
in driver to use.
-load and dive into the boot loader
- bye bye kansas.

  After that the whole machine apart from the BIOS PROMS is available 
for modification, and in most cases, it will be modified completely.

In general the kernel will rush around interrogating I/O ports to find 
responses it recognises, and setting up handlers for what it finds: In 
case of unknown issues, it will refer to its disk based config files to 
load the correct stuff. Once it is relatively happy, it will launch the 
init daemon, which looks in ITS config files and carries on spawning 
daemons that get the machine up and running, until it finally spawns 
some kind of user interface.

At that point the BIOS is just a set of ROMS, idle and silent, and 
completely forgotten.

If for no other reason than the ROM bus speed is often WAY below the RAM 
bus speed: Using the ROMS will slow you down.

So, The onboard ROM BIOS only needs to understand the boot hardware. Of 
course you COULD talk about the hardware interface systems in the kernel 
as a BIOS as well, and be correct to do so, but BIOS on Intel machines 
of the PC variety is generally held to be that part that comes with the 
hardware in ROM: In a Linux context the terns 'device drivers' or 
'device subsystem' and 'kernel' would be used instead to talk about 
various aspects of the kernel that deal with interfacing with the hardware.

I hope that helps.







0
The
8/7/2007 12:21:18 PM
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
....
> I hope that helps.

	Yes, thank you.

-- 
Every paid position as a university professor originated as a labor of love
without any form of financial reward.
	-- The Iron Webmaster, 3849
  nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
  Iraqi democracy http://www.giwersworld.org/911/armless.phtml a3
0
Matt
8/8/2007 5:20:51 AM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Linux, Linux, Linux
Hi, Interested in trying Linux? Well you came to comp.os.linux.advocacy for some reason, and you probably won't stay long. Here's a list of Linux distributions to choose from. Ubuntu http://www.ubuntu.com Newbie friendly and good support forums. SuSE http://www.novell.com/linux Pay for some support if you're not opposed to spending a little money. Fedora Core http://fedoraproject.org If you're more comfortable with your computer, try this one out. If you get frustrated, don't give up so easy. There is a wealth of information online for whichever distro you choose....

Why linux is linux
We don't destroy, we create. We don't imitate, we build. We are not a network, we are a personal OS. -- http://www.texeme.com Hi John, Attempting to Speak for Linux, You wrote: << We don't destroy, we create. We don't imitate, we build. We are not a network, we are a personal OS. >> Linux is more like this: << Like everything else, we consume and are consumed. We exchange ideas with everyone, to the point where it's almost impossible to track. We are artisans, not mass producers. >> Jeff Relf wrote: > Linux is mo...

Linux!! Linux!!
From http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.os.linux.misc/about This month 16 t...@invalid.invalid 15 ahlstr...@launchmodem.com 14 goldee_loxnbag...@gmail.com 10 jhas...@newsguy.com 9 mil...@yoyo.org 9 hel...@deepsoft.com 9 hadronqu...@gmail.com 8 ronb02nos...@gmail.com 7 secret...@lxny.org 7 ignoramus8...@nospam.8345.invalid All time 5421 p...@oboe.it.uc3m.es 4508 michael+use...@www.heiming.de 3530 j...@dhh.gt.org 3066 hel...@deepsoft.com 2991 nike_jordan_...@yahoo.com.cn 2651 jdbe...@exit109.com 2474 gra...@visi.com 2216 nikejordangoo...@hotmail.com 1890 rkiesl...@mainmatte...

I have Linux! I have Linux!
Ok, after two days of trying to get Windos 1900 installed and working , I sat down an hour ago and installed Linux. In an hour. Smirk. Ok, I will be honest. I did have some problems, but I believe they were of my own ignorance. 0) I started with trying to install Suse. However, I couldn't get it to install. Why? Because I didn't read the menu. There is a startup menu and the first entry is boot to harddisk. I thought that was the thing to do so I did it about 4 times. Then I gave up. However, I went back to it and subsequently realized that I should have chosen the 2nd men...

My Linux is not your Linux
To the denizens of comp.os.linux.advocacy! So many people demonstrate in this newsgroup that they know only a Linux of Hatred and Greed, of paranoia, and of a selfish sense of entitlement. They seem always to be behaving like monkeys in reaction to human dissenters, throwing feces at one another and beating their chests pretending to know something. My Linux is not that Linux. My Linux is the Linux of Love, of sharing, friendship, community. It is a uniquely human Linux and not one for monkeys. When I speak with fellow Linux users in real life (i.e. not in the monkeyhouse of COLA) they remin...

[News] Review of the Linux-based iRex, Linux CTO Recommends Linux-based EBook Readers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 iRex Digital Reader DR1000S ,----[ Quote ] | iRex extended its electronic book line back in September last year, but it's | taken us more than a couple of weeks to get used to its new DR1000s Digital | Reader and understand that this is really a new class of product, rather than | an evolution of the smaller readers of the past. `---- http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/07/23/review_electronic_book_irex_digtal_reader_dr1000s/ Why the Sony PRS-505/PRS-700 is a Better Choice Than the Kindle ,----[ Quote ] | I think the Sony e-Reader is a...

[News] [Linux] Linux-based Recording Studio and Linux at the Indy 500
Daniel James interview (LXF 93) ,----[ Quote ] | Daniel James is the project directory of the audio distro 64 Studio. He set | up 64 Studio Ltd to provide development services to hardware OEMs, and | support to users in studios. James also runs a Linux-based recording studio | near his home on the Isle of Wight. `---- http://www.linuxformat.co.uk/mag/james.html Push for Indy 500's first TeamLinux car stirs controversy ,----[ Quote ] | Tux500 has grabbed the attention of at least one person outside the | Linux community, who has set up a competing project called Vista500. | Speaking ...

All Reel Time Operating Systems ( Linux based ) Other than RT-linux
Hi all, I want to know, there are any REAL TIME OPERATING systems( RTOS) which should have total linux compatible other than RT- Linux. And are there any free Real time Operating systems ( Linux Based ) is available on the Internet. Please provide some information regarding this issue. ...

[News] [Linux] More Speculations About a Google OS Based on GNU/Linux
Google admits that it is going after Microsoft Office... Is Windows next? ,----[ Quote ] | So that brings us to the obvious question: What about the operating | system? There have been rumors for years about a Google PC and/or | Google OS that was based on Linux and aimed at providing a simple, | intuitive desktop for the masses. Naturally, that Google PC would | primarily be an Internet terminal that features Google's online | applications. `---- http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/hiner/?p=465 Still getting slapped for spyware (Dell) and news aggregators... Google stands firm behind N...

All Real Time Operating Systems ( linux Based ) Other than RT-linux
Hi all, I want to know, there are any REAL TIME OPERATING systems( RTOS) which should have total linux compatible other than RT- Linux. And are there any free Real time Operating systems ( Linux Based ) is available on the Internet. Please provide some information regarding this issue. mahi wrote: > Hi all, I want to know, there are any REAL TIME OPERATING > systems( RTOS) which should have total linux compatible other than RT- > Linux. > > And are there any free Real time Operating systems ( Linux Based ) is > available on the Internet. > > Please provide some in...

[News] [Linux] Another Wireless Solution Uses Linux-based OS
Aerohive Courts Controller-less WiFi ,----[ Quote ] | One startup is trying to get rid of the controller to save customers | some important dollars. | | [...] | | Aerohive's cooperative control access point is called the HiveAP 20 | ag and runs HiveOS on top of standard hardware and a standard Linux | kernel. . Flynn explained that HiveOS is based on Linux, with | Aerohive sprinkling in some features for good measure. `---- http://www.internetnews.com/infra/article.php/3676391 ...

[News] [Linux] Improved Linux SDIO stack; Linux-based Set-top Box Gets Opera
Linux SDIO stack targets high-throughput apps ,----[ Quote ] | SDIO Nex uses an "entirely new" architecture designed for low | processor utilization and maximum throughput, Arasan said. `---- http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3979314345.html Linux-based "triple play" gateways gain web browser ,----[ Quote ] | Tilgin (formerly i3 Micro) has added the Opera web browser to two | of its Linux-based set-top boxes, Opera reports. Opera 9 for | Devices will allow Tilgin customers to create user interfaces | based on Web standards, in addition to letting end-users browse | t...

[News] [Linux] Storage Appliance Uses Linux and Wins Praises; Newer Linux-based TV is Coming
Backups again - Bacula ,----[ Quote ] | Just a quick note to mention how impressed I have been with my current | backup solution, Bacula (using an Overland Neo2000 tape library, which | also does the job nicely). `---- http://www.oreillynet.com/linux/blog/2007/05/backups_again_bacula.html Mythbuntu 7.04 Public Alpha 1 ,----[ Quote ] | After lots of hard work the past month, the Mythbuntu team is | proud to present our first publicly announced Alpha. `---- http://www.mythbuntu.org/node/10 ...

[News] Everything in Mobile Devices is Linux, Linux, Linux....
Better Than Kindle? ,----[ Quote ] | While I'm thinking about all the things I'd do with it, this is what comes to | my mind: this thing cost around $400. There are few other devices that cost | that much these days: | | * Nokia N810 | * Asus eeePC 701 | * OLPC `---- http://justanystuff.blogspot.com/2007/12/better-than-kindle.html Here's a good early look at Android: Hands on with Android: XML Parsing ,----[ Quote ] | Here is an XML parser that I created to showcase Android’s UI. It retrieves | NBA, MLB and NFL scores off of my web server. The true beauty is ...

Web resources about - All RTOS (linux Based ) Other than RT-Linux - comp.os.linux.setup

VLC gets first major release across Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, iOS, Windows Phone, Windows RT, and ...
Emil Protalinski / VentureBeat : VLC gets first major release across Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, iOS, Windows Phone, Windows RT, and Android ...

VLC gets first major release across Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, iOS, Windows Phone, Windows RT, and ...
... a closer look platform-by-platform. Windows, Mac, and Linux First and foremost, VLC media player 2.2.0 adds a feature that has been supported ...

Resources last updated: 2/14/2016 3:50:46 AM