Re: RT patch acceptance

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Bill Huey (hui) wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 12:21:20AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:


And my questions for which I got no answer were things like
"why is a single kernel superior to a nanokernel for hard-RT?",
"what deterministic services would a hard-RT Linux need to provide?"


That's an RT begineer's question. You have to at least be up to speed
in that one to have the conversation at hand and folks have discussed
this repeatedly. It's not our end that failing and clearly you not
understanding this only reenforces this point..

Bill, you can belittle me to your heart's content. It really
doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Whenever you or anyone else try to complicate the Linux kernel
with hard-RT stuff, I'm going to ask exactly the same questions
because I don't think you know how a nanokernel solution would
work, or even what kind of services a hard-RT Linux would need
to provide.

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com -
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux