3 Jun
2013
3 Jun
'13
8:15 a.m.
On 06/03/2013 08:53 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
On 2 June 2013 17:21, Tothwolf <tothwolf at
concentric.net> wrote:
This is one of those rare occasions in which you and I agree.
There's nothing good about the 80386 (as an architecture) for embedded
use. We have very, very good processors now; there's no excuse for
using that crap other than incompetence and kickbacks. (the same is
true in other areas of computing as well)
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?
You'd think this, but many of them are connected, and that's on the
rise. That's why I suggested that I expect someone will likely re-add
i386 support to Linux. We'll see.
It's not my field but I would have thought that
something like QNX was
a better fit for that kind of thing, anyway.
QNX has a big part of the market, but it *sucks* compared to more
modern OSs.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA