3 Jun
2013
3 Jun
'13
5:53 a.m.
On 2 June 2013 17:21, Tothwolf <tothwolf at concentric.net> wrote:
The Linux kernel is still only as big as you compile it. It can still be
built pretty small. The issue of dropping i386 is a different matter -- some
developers were "inconvenienced" by some of the old code, and rather than
redesign it so that they could handle some newer stuff while still
supporting the i386, they simply removed that code entirely.
I'm sure you're right, but nonetheless, I think my reasoning still
stands. There are far better choices for embedded CPUs than an 80386
these days.
For an old device, use an old Linux. Most of 'em won't be
Internet-connected & so security fixes should not be an issue, surely?
Where is that goal defined, and for which
"project"?
It's where it is heading. It's basically a desktop/server OS and
always has been.
There is no reason why a modular Linux distribution
such as Debian can't
support both cases, and handle both very well.
Sure, but is it worth the additional developer effort for an edge case?
Not even decades old, some as little as 5 years old
(or less) can't handle
more than 256MB or 512MB of ram. Embedded boards generally aren't marketed
for applications that require multi-GB of memory. Many of these (fanless)
boards are designed to remain in service for decades.
And why shouldn't their software remain in service for decades, as well?
It's not my field but I would have thought that something like QNX was
a better fit for that kind of thing, anyway.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884