2 Jun
2013
2 Jun
'13
10:34 a.m.
On Sun, 2 Jun 2013, Tothwolf wrote:
Gotta love the new wave of unappreciative programmers, eh?
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
On Sun, 2 Jun 2013, Liam Proven wrote:
I thought part of the linux development procedure was to change everything
and drop compatability for no reason? (example: constantly changing
module API). ;)
On 2 June 2013 10:55, 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.
Right now there seems to be a gap in the market
for a Linux
distribution tailored for small/embedded systems which is also easy to
maintain/update with a halfway decent package management system.
You're right, there is, and something like that /was/ the target of
the ROOL Project, but that's folded now.
Even distros with a retro core, e.g. Debian or Slackware, still target
modern PCs and that means that they're getting big. The Linux kernel
itself is very big & complex now. Ergo, what you
want is in conflict with the general goal of the project
- to be the best Free Unix it can, in competition with Windows and Mac
OS X.
Where is that goal defined, and for which "project"?
There is no reason why a modular Linux distribution such as Debian can't
support both cases, and handle both very well. The issue I've witnessed
first hand is that many (not all) such "developers" don't want to support
what they consider "old obsolete hardware" (look at Firefox, for example).
The general attitude seems to be more "that's old hardware, just go buy a
new PC". That doesn't work when you have an embedded application where you
aren't dealing with a "PC". Some examples would be a single board computer
used in an information kiosk (where you would want a small GUI) or a
CompactPCI based application with lots of network interfaces (where you
don't want a GUI at all). Neither of those can be replaced inexpensively
(and certainly not with a cheap "PC") and since the issue isn't
CPU-performance related, there is (or at least should be) no reason to
replace them. Unfortunately this makes it less suitable for
decades-old legacy kit,
yes - but there are lots of other OSes for that. If you want to stay
with something Unix-like, I'd point at the BSDs, Minix, or maybeeven
Plan 9.
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.