vxworks vs lynxos 4

  • Permalink
  • submit to reddit
  • Email
  • Follow


Hi,

At my company we are deciding between vxworks and lynx os 4.0.
Our App is going to do sockets and a couple of threads with a semaphore.

lynx os's web site says there are lots of projects that failed on vxworks.

Are there any skelitons in lynx os's closet  to make a more informed choice?

Thanks


0
Reply spam40 (680) 10/2/2003 8:45:47 PM

See related articles to this posting


I worked for Wind from 1998 to 2002, I worked with vxWorks from 1989. I 
have worked with LynxOS since 3/2003.

My main observation would be that the cycle time for our LynxOS project 
is much greater than it was for any vxWorks project. In vxWorks if I 
modified a driver then I'd make in the top level directory and boot my 
target, a minute later my new software is working (well, at lest on the 
machine and trying, we all make mistakes). When I rebuild this system my 
main build environment is Win2k but I need to rebuild the LynxOS to 
include the new drivers. We often modify structures that map to both and 
have to rebuild everything. With ftping software and rebuilding in 
several directories then ftping in the applications it takes an hour or 
so to wind the handle on this system. If it had been done differently 
then perhaps it could be quicker, but I miss the comparatively fast 
reboots on vxWorks.

I miss the debugger and WindView too.

We have had issues with LynxOS that were solved with a huge patch too, 
that was not as forthcoming as I would have expected from Wind. Wind 
tends to air its dirty washing in public, you can browse patches and see 
if any of them address your areas of concern.

LynxOS employs a number of former Wind people, they would know all about 
things Wind has done wrong. I don't believe Wind has the same benefit. 
Having said that I am not personally aware of projects that have failed 
because of the choice of vxWorks, which doesn't mean there aren't any. 
WinCE was certainly known for crashing a few companies who couldn't make 
it work on their hardware.

The big downer for vxWorks used to be availability of the source, but if 
what I heard recently is correct then the source is now very affordable. 
Rebuilding the entire source on a Solaris box was just a case of going 
to the top of the tree and typing (for example)

make CPU=PENTIUM4 TOOL=gnu

If you modify a bit of the o/s you only need to make in that directory.

We are having issues getting a coherent build and target between several 
developers and their target systems.

I can't see any great advantage of LynxOS over Linux, the disadvantage 
is that they have less that 1% of the developers and they don't make the 
source readily available.

To be fair to LynxOS to rebuild the kernel on a target you do this:

cd /sys/lynx.os
touch CONFIG.TBL
make install

You may also have to make all in sys/devices.

Given my current issues; if we were in the market for an OS I'd be 
looking forward to giving the WR sales folks a hell of a hard time on 
price, and failing that I'd be looking at Linux or BSD (which has much 
better licensing from a commercial perspective). If you aren't a good 
negotiator you can end up getting a less than sweetheart deal on target 
licenses from any commercial vendor.

Wind need to pull their finger out on the device driver front, but their 
device drivers are relatively easy to write and there is a reasonable 
course.

vxWorks isn't ideal, I have little use for Tornado in day to day use, 
but they still suck less. Their support isn't what it once was, but then 
I know my way round the source tree from a year in major account support 
and four in services, so there aren't a lot of questions you can't 
answer with the source.

Wind's editor sucks, I don't know why they even bother. Visual Slick 
Edit is a lot better. VSE is also more capable than MS VDS which Lynx 
interfaces to. My main complaint is that the cross referencing in VDS 
depends on being able to compile the code, VSE will browse stuff that 
won't compile. With vxWorks I'd edit in VSE if I had it or Emacs if I 
didn't. Tornado can call out to other editors, but the link isn't great. 
I didn't work with Wind's latest and greatest Tornado, so I don't know 
if the latest IDE ever saw the light of day.

Summary... LynxOS wouldn't be top of my list.

I don't think I've said anything actionable, so I better stop now.

Chris
Speaking for myself alone, certainly not for my employer who may have 
very good reasons for not agreeing with me at all :-)

Zaa wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> At my company we are deciding between vxworks and lynx os 4.0.
> Our App is going to do sockets and a couple of threads with a semaphore.
> 
> lynx os's web site says there are lots of projects that failed on vxworks.
> 
> Are there any skelitons in lynx os's closet  to make a more informed choice?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> VxWorks Users Group mailing list
> VxWexplo@lbl.gov
> http://www-csg.lbl.gov/vxworks/
> 

0
Reply chann94501 (45) 10/2/2003 9:53:24 PM

Thanks for this very interesting reply !!!!

LC

"Chris Hann" <chann94501@yahoo.com> a �crit dans le message de
news:mailman.62.1065131619.1533.vxwexplo@csg.lbl.gov...
> I worked for Wind from 1998 to 2002, I worked with vxWorks from 1989. I
> have worked with LynxOS since 3/2003.
>
> My main observation would be that the cycle time for our LynxOS project
> is much greater than it was for any vxWorks project. In vxWorks if I
> modified a driver then I'd make in the top level directory and boot my
> target, a minute later my new software is working (well, at lest on the
> machine and trying, we all make mistakes). When I rebuild this system my
> main build environment is Win2k but I need to rebuild the LynxOS to
> include the new drivers. We often modify structures that map to both and
> have to rebuild everything. With ftping software and rebuilding in
> several directories then ftping in the applications it takes an hour or
> so to wind the handle on this system. If it had been done differently
> then perhaps it could be quicker, but I miss the comparatively fast
> reboots on vxWorks.
>
> I miss the debugger and WindView too.
>
> We have had issues with LynxOS that were solved with a huge patch too,
> that was not as forthcoming as I would have expected from Wind. Wind
> tends to air its dirty washing in public, you can browse patches and see
> if any of them address your areas of concern.
>
> LynxOS employs a number of former Wind people, they would know all about
> things Wind has done wrong. I don't believe Wind has the same benefit.
> Having said that I am not personally aware of projects that have failed
> because of the choice of vxWorks, which doesn't mean there aren't any.
> WinCE was certainly known for crashing a few companies who couldn't make
> it work on their hardware.
>
> The big downer for vxWorks used to be availability of the source, but if
> what I heard recently is correct then the source is now very affordable.
> Rebuilding the entire source on a Solaris box was just a case of going
> to the top of the tree and typing (for example)
>
> make CPU=PENTIUM4 TOOL=gnu
>
> If you modify a bit of the o/s you only need to make in that directory.
>
> We are having issues getting a coherent build and target between several
> developers and their target systems.
>
> I can't see any great advantage of LynxOS over Linux, the disadvantage
> is that they have less that 1% of the developers and they don't make the
> source readily available.
>
> To be fair to LynxOS to rebuild the kernel on a target you do this:
>
> cd /sys/lynx.os
> touch CONFIG.TBL
> make install
>
> You may also have to make all in sys/devices.
>
> Given my current issues; if we were in the market for an OS I'd be
> looking forward to giving the WR sales folks a hell of a hard time on
> price, and failing that I'd be looking at Linux or BSD (which has much
> better licensing from a commercial perspective). If you aren't a good
> negotiator you can end up getting a less than sweetheart deal on target
> licenses from any commercial vendor.
>
> Wind need to pull their finger out on the device driver front, but their
> device drivers are relatively easy to write and there is a reasonable
> course.
>
> vxWorks isn't ideal, I have little use for Tornado in day to day use,
> but they still suck less. Their support isn't what it once was, but then
> I know my way round the source tree from a year in major account support
> and four in services, so there aren't a lot of questions you can't
> answer with the source.
>
> Wind's editor sucks, I don't know why they even bother. Visual Slick
> Edit is a lot better. VSE is also more capable than MS VDS which Lynx
> interfaces to. My main complaint is that the cross referencing in VDS
> depends on being able to compile the code, VSE will browse stuff that
> won't compile. With vxWorks I'd edit in VSE if I had it or Emacs if I
> didn't. Tornado can call out to other editors, but the link isn't great.
> I didn't work with Wind's latest and greatest Tornado, so I don't know
> if the latest IDE ever saw the light of day.
>
> Summary... LynxOS wouldn't be top of my list.
>
> I don't think I've said anything actionable, so I better stop now.
>
> Chris
> Speaking for myself alone, certainly not for my employer who may have
> very good reasons for not agreeing with me at all :-)
>
> Zaa wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > At my company we are deciding between vxworks and lynx os 4.0.
> > Our App is going to do sockets and a couple of threads with a semaphore.
> >
> > lynx os's web site says there are lots of projects that failed on
vxworks.
> >
> > Are there any skelitons in lynx os's closet  to make a more informed
choice?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > VxWorks Users Group mailing list
> > VxWexplo@lbl.gov
> > http://www-csg.lbl.gov/vxworks/
> >
>


0
Reply me677 (5) 10/3/2003 7:46:28 AM

I use both.  If OS's are cars, then I consider VxWorks my Chevy and LynxOS
my Mercedes.
I drive the Mercedes as much as possible!

"Zaa" <spam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:EPWdnd0vXIjiE-GiU-KYjQ@comcast.com...
> Hi,
>
> At my company we are deciding between vxworks and lynx os 4.0.
> Our App is going to do sockets and a couple of threads with a semaphore.
>
> lynx os's web site says there are lots of projects that failed on vxworks.
>
> Are there any skelitons in lynx os's closet  to make a more informed
choice?
>
> Thanks
>
>


0
Reply replyToGroup6955 (2) 10/20/2003 4:31:47 PM

I use both.  If OS's are cars, then I consider VxWorks my Chevy and LynxOS
my Mercedes.
I drive the Mercedes as much as possible!
If you need it, LOS tech support is first class!

"Zaa" <spam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:EPWdnd0vXIjiE-GiU-KYjQ@comcast.com...
> Hi,
>
> At my company we are deciding between vxworks and lynx os 4.0.
> Our App is going to do sockets and a couple of threads with a semaphore.
>
> lynx os's web site says there are lots of projects that failed on vxworks.
>
> Are there any skelitons in lynx os's closet  to make a more informed
choice?
>
> Thanks
>
>



0
Reply replyToGroup6955 (2) 10/20/2003 4:35:32 PM
comp.os.vxworks 5904 articles. 6 followers. Post

4 Replies
171 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 14


  • Permalink
  • submit to reddit
  • Email
  • Follow


Reply:

Similar Artilces:

VxWorks 6.3 vs. VxWorks 6.4 (and 5 and 6)
Hello, I have been told that some of the system libraries in VxWorks 6.4 and above have been rewritten. I have a BSP that works in VxWorks 6.3 but does not work in VxWorks 6.4 or above. The BSP came with source code so I am thinking of migrating it to 6.4. What are the differences? The network library was mentioned in my discussions. Regards! Xavi Hi Xavi, I know that a complete new IP stack is introduced in vxWorks 6.5 and above but not sure if there is a big difference between 6.3 and 6.4. Better to ask WindRiver for release notes. Best Regards VKG | Ritsoft Technologies Wind River ...

Comparison between VxWorks 6, LynxOS 4.0 and INTEGCITY5?
Hi, Has anybody done a comparison between VxWorks 6, LynxOS 4.0 and INTEGRITY5? I am well versed with VxWorks and enjoy the new Eclipse IDE (VxWorks 6). However, my goal is to find a COTS RTOS that is cost effective and certifiable to RTCA/DO178B level D. All the latter mentioned RTOSes support space partitioning, which is a prerequisite for running multiple criticality levels on the same processor. This application is for the aerospace industry. SwGuy ...

Comparison between VxWorks 6, LynxOS 4.0 and INTEGRITY 5?
Hi, Has anybody done a comparison between VxWorks 6, LynxOS 4.0 and INTEGRITY 5? I am well versed with VxWorks and enjoy the new Eclipse IDE (VxWorks 6). However, my goal is to find a COTS RTOS that is cost effective and certifiable to RTCA/DO178B level D. All the latter mentioned RTOSes support space partitioning, which is a prerequisite for running multiple criticality levels on the same processor. This application is for the aerospace industry. SwGuy Hi SwGuy, There is a product from Windriver its called ARINC653.I think that is DO178B level D certified and that will suit your requirem...

4-port SATA RAID
Greetings, I'm currently in the market for a 4-drive SATA controller. Anyone have any especially good or bad experiences or, even better, comparisons between the 3ware 8506-4LP, Adaptec 2410SA, or LSI MegaRAID 150-4? Benchmarks and other alternatives especially welcome. My primary concerns are operation under Linux, and all of them seem to be very well supported, and reliability. As of now, other than the slightly lower price of the LSI, I'm not seeing any reason to choose one over any other. I plan to fill in this chart as I get information: http://moore.cx/experie...

Corvette (4-7) vs 4-6 and 4-C
4-6 and 4-7 look pretty similar aside from the termpacks for twin- tailing and the differential external bus. The 4-6 is full length. 20MHz AMD 186 microcontroller. 4-C PCB layout is very similar to 4-6, but no empty PLCC socket but instead what looks like 2 extra ROMs. 40MHz AMD 186 microcontroller. Flash chips are dated 11/97. This 7012-G40 must be the end of the line of MCA boxes IBM produced. Was anybody ever ambition enough to benchmark a Corvette vs. 4-C? http://ps-2.kev009.com:8081/ohlandl/IBM_SCSI/ibm_scsi.html http://ps-2.kev009.com:8081/ohlandl/IBM_SCSI/SCSI-DFW.htm...

Re: Qedit vs CodeWright vs Whisper vs ? #4
Whisper absolutely rocks, I've been using it since 1.0, best thing I've ever seen for improved productivity. At 07:03 AM 3/2/2004, Tom Brandt wrote: >I use Whisper Tech's Programmer Studio, and am very happy with it. Easy to >use, lots of nice featuers, connects to MPE, Unix, Windows, fairly >inexpensive. > >At 03:48 PM 3/1/2004, Tracy Pierce wrote: >>I've been a fond fan of Qedit(host) for many years now; already knowing this >>editor leads me to stay with it when looking for a good client/server >>editor. >> >>But I a...

Backspace in Pico 4.4 vs. Pico 4.2
I am on Windows using a terminal emulator program to access two different IP addresses. In the shell, pressing the backspace key on my keyboard deletes the character preceding the cursor ("delete left"). This works on both IP addresses. One IP address is running Pico 4.2. In Pico 4.2, the backspace key does a delete left, same as the shell. If I execute pico using "pico -d", the backspace key deletes the character under the cursor ("delete right"). The other IP address is running Pico 4.4. In Pico 4.4, the backspace key does a delete right. If I...

"with circles" CVS 4.5.0 vs 4.4.0
I have just downloaded the latest CVS version (4.5.0) and installed it on three different machines to realize that I couldn't do something I was able to get with my previous version (4.3.0). When I try the following command below (with 4.5.0): "pl sin(x) w circles" I am getting nothing displayed except "sin(x) o" as a key in the right top corner. When I execute the same command with 4.3.0, I get circles all around. I just downloaded 4.4.0, and I was able to get circles displayed as it should be (?). Why does not the latest CVS version display the sam...

[ace-users] ACE 5.4.4 LynxOS 4.0 build error
ACE VERSION: 5.4.4 HOST MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM: LynxOS4.0.0 LynxOS4.0.0 TARGET MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM, if different from HOST: COMPILER NAME AND VERSION (AND PATCHLEVEL): GNU make - version 3.79.1 THE $ACE_ROOT/ace/config.h FILE [if you use a link to a platform- specific file, simply state which one]: #include "ace/config-lynxos.h" THE $ACE_ROOT/include/makeinclude/platform_macros.GNU FILE [if you use a link to a platform-specific file, simply state which one (unless this isn't used in this case, e.g., with Microsoft Visual C++)]: except...

4.31 vs 4.41
As usual, I'm right on top of things, just noticed Peg is at 4.41. I'm using 4.31 under Vista, seems to be working just fine. Any particularly good reason to upgrade? -- Good breeding consists of concealing how much we think of ourselves and how little we think of the other person. ....Mark Twain Steve a �crit : > As usual, I'm right on top of things, just noticed Peg is at 4.41. I'm > using 4.31 under Vista, seems to be working just fine. Any > particularly good reason to upgrade? Bayesian spam filtering (spamhalter) included since v4.41 is *TH...

[ace-users] FW: ACE 5.4.4 LynxOS 4.0 build error
> ACE VERSION: 5.4.4 > HOST MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM: > LynxOS4.0.0 > LynxOS4.0.0 > TARGET MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM, if different from HOST: COMPILER NAME AND VERSION (AND PATCHLEVEL): > GNU make - version 3.79.1 > THE $ACE_ROOT/ace/config.h FILE [if you use a link to a platform- specific file, simply state which one]: > #include "ace/config-lynxos.h" > THE $ACE_ROOT/include/makeinclude/platform_macros.GNU FILE [if you use a link to a platform-specific file, simply state which one (unless this isn't used in this ...

Re: [ace-users] ACE 5.4.4 LynxOS 4.0 build error
Hi Olli, Can you please shed any light onto the following questions? Thanks, Doug >> ACE VERSION: 5.4.4 >> HOST MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM: >> LynxOS4.0.0 >> LynxOS4.0.0 >> TARGET MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM, if different from HOST: COMPILER NAME AND VERSION (AND PATCHLEVEL): >> GNU make - version 3.79.1 >> THE $ACE_ROOT/ace/config.h FILE [if you use a link to a platform- specific file, simply state which one]: >> #include "ace/config-lynxos.h" &...

PHP 4.4.4 vs Perl 5.8.7 for Object Oriented server code
Hi, Have you run into a situation where you had to switch from PHP 4.x.x to Perl 5.x.x in order to get better performance? I am using an OO approach to PHP for my website's server code. There is one tiny script, with dozens of small objects. Each object is in a separate source file. It is a bit slow, even when the code doesn't do much DiskIO or MySQL. My webhost (NetSol) uses PHP 4.4 running on Apache 1.3 and Linux. I have to option to use Perl 5.8.7. That is the only alternative they give me at this time. Without doing the rewite, I am trying to determine if I can expect any...

[ace-users] FW: FW: ACE 5.4.4 LynxOS 4.0 build error
I tried upgrading to 5.4.5 and still have the same issue. Christine -----Original Message----- From: Olli Savia [mailto:ops@iki.fi] Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 1:46 PM To: Ballard, Christine Subject: Re: FW: ACE 5.4.4 LynxOS 4.0 build error Hi I recommend upgrading to ACE 5.4.5 and see if your problem is fixed. Thanks, Olli Ballard, Christine wrote: >>ACE VERSION: 5.4.4 >>HOST MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM: >> LynxOS4.0.0 >> LynxOS4.0.0 >>TARGET MACHINE and OPERATING SYSTEM, if different from HOST: COMPILER NAME AND V...

RE: [ace-users] FW: FW: ACE 5.4.4 LynxOS 4.0 build error
Hi, > I tried upgrading to 5.4.5 and still have the same issue. Christine Can you check whether LynxOS has the vsprintf function in its system headers and then what the exact signature is and in which file it is declared? Regards, Johnny Willemsen Remedy IT Postbus 101 2650 AC Berkel en Rodenrijs The Netherlands www.theaceorb.nl / www.remedy.nl > > -----Original Message----- > From: Olli Savia [mailto:ops@iki.fi] > Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 1:46 PM > To: Ballard, Christine > Subject: Re: FW: ACE 5.4.4 LynxOS 4.0 build error > > &...

Pentium 4 vs Mobile 4 In Laptop
Hi, I'm looking at an HP Pavilion zv5160. I can pick it up today at Circuit City with an Intel Pentium 4 2.8gHz, or I can get it on the HP website and substitute a Mobile Pentium Intel 4 2.8gHz (for $25) but the delivery is three weeks. Question...my understanding is that although the Mobile P4 will save battery life ,it is not the same as the Centrino package and that the Centrino package runs better, but uses a slower clock speed to save power. There are some other items I'd like on the site, that aren't on the Circuit City model (internal floppy, 12 cell battery inste...

4.2 vs. 4.1 incompatibility???
Greetings, After upgrading the ntp server for a local subnet from RH 7.3 to Mandrake 10.0 the internal nodes can no longer synch to that server's ntpd. It's a bit odd, because they can see different stratum values depending upon the connection method. The clients are in 192.168.1.* and this server is 192.168.1.220 = safserver.cluster. All machines have timezone set to PDT. ( Sorry about the wrap here...) % ntpq -p safserver.cluster remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter =====================================================================...

VxWorks autoconf in ACE 5.4.4?
I'm relatively new to ACE and even newer to attempting to build it. We need both VxWorks 5.5.1 and Linux w/gcc 3.4 (eg fedore core 3). I have 5.4.4 built via autoconf (/configure etc.) for Linux, nice and clean. I see 'vxworks' in some of the autoconf scripts but can't get it to configure (./configure --target=vxworks or --host=vxworks etc all complain about an unknown machine type). I'm not an autoconf guru, or even neophyte so I need help - does ACE 5.4.4 autoconf support VxWorks yet? Currently we build Linux via autoconf and VxWorks "the old way&qu...

bestcrypt 7.20 vs drivecrypt 4.4
I must choose between bestcrypt 7.20 or drivecrypt 4.4 I have fear of backdoor both the software is not opensource and high risk for backdoor I do not succeed to understand which it is secure help me thanks i went to the manufactururs wecsite for both of the mentioned products and must recommend DriveCrypt as it has a very good encryption algorithm and bit rate also the company that creates it warrants that there are no backdoors GUARANTEED and their website looks more professional which incresses the chances of lagitimacy I Recommend DriveCrypt 4.x to view t...

float (*Data)[4] vs float *Data[4]
hi , i ve int (*Data)[4]; int A[4]={1,2,3,4}; Data=&A; //Question here, how d i dynamically allocate space for Data using calloc? printf("%d\n",*Data[0]) ; //gives 1 //But printf("%d\n",*Data[1]) produces weird value. Can somebody please tell me what is the correct way to dynamically allocate space for int (*Data)[4] as also to access the in dividual elements of the array that it points to. thanks kutty Kutty Banerjee wrote: > hi , > i ve > int (*Data)[4]; Data is a pointer to an array 4 of int. > int A[4]={1,2,3,4}; A is an arr...

Quark 4 vs 6 vs InDesign stability......
If trying to do a cost-benefit analysis on the relative merits of Quark in 9 and X, and InDesign. So you use Quark a lot. Its the first program you open when you start up. You import PDF, TIFFS, .docs, and JPGs, you auto-activate your fonts. Document are normally more than 20 pages. You're hardcore. How often a day will Quark crash on you? I'd like to know what OS , what version of Quark you use, if you work from a server, if so what the server? do you copy files to the desktop, then move back to the server? The reasoning behind this is I am trying to discover if the crashes we have...

Re: SAS vs. SPLUS vs. SAS #4
matrix is indispensible tool in implementing modern data mining algorithm, but we only have native matrix opertion capability in IML. Recently I discovered that in SAS/Base SAS/Stat, we were able to conduct several important matrix manipulations and I able to translate those prototype algorithms on textbook into SAS. I just submited a paper to SGF2010 on this topic, hope the paper can be accepted. On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 13:09:32 -0800, Paul Miller <pjmiller_57@YAHOO.COM> wrote: >Hello Everyone, >� >I’ve recently become interested in sequential clinical trials des...

Re: Performance: IF vs. Informat vs. Format #4
Andy, Ian has often made the point that a good program strikes the right balance between (1) programming performance (which includes not only coding but also maintenance and change control) and (2) machine performance. From the standpoint of #1, a good strategy is, as Mary has suggested, to store the recoding arguments and responses in a control file. Then your program should first generate look-up code. If subsequently you should need to add code-recode pairs or change them, you will not need to change the programs, but only the control file, which is of particular convenience for one opera...

Re: 8.3 vs 8.4 #4
>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Gyselinck <bind-users@lists.b0rken.net> writes: Jan> Well, upwards of say 500 queries a second is nothing for Jan> modern PC's. But you presume that everybody can choose the Jan> hardware to run the software on, that's completely wrong Jan> though. I'm making no assumptions about someone's choice of hardware. I was just giving an example of what cheap commodity hardware can deliver. Presumably high-end servers should have much better throughput than that because of better I/O bandwidth, f...