Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?
From: Drily Lit Raga (midicad2001_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 10/15/05
- Previous message: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- In reply to: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Next in thread: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Reply: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Reply: Paul Taylor: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 14 Oct 2005 17:35:17 -0700
Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2005-10-14, Drily Lit Raga <midicad2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Answered most of my questions by scouting the WWW for awhile.
> >
> > Now I don't know why you would NOT want to use EL.
>
> 1) Lack of resources? [It's pretty hard to run Linux with 40KB of
> RAM and 132KB of ROM.]
Seems like 2 MB ROM and 16 MB RAM practical minimum for EL from what
I've read?
> 2) It's not real-time?
It's not a pre-emptive multitasker? Or is there some other specific
aspect of it that prevents it from being RT (trying to learn all this)?
>
> 3) You've got application code that was written for another
> OS?
OK.
> 4) You don't want to deal with distributing source code for
> GPL'ed software?
Will look into what this means.
Thanks,
DLR
- Previous message: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- In reply to: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Next in thread: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Reply: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Reply: Paul Taylor: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]