From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 25 May 2002 12:05:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 25 May 2002 12:05:38 -0400 Received: from bitmover.com ([192.132.92.2]:24530 "EHLO bitmover.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 25 May 2002 12:05:37 -0400 Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 09:05:37 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: Erwin Rol Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, RTAI users Subject: Re: RTAI/RtLinux Message-ID: <20020525090537.G28795@work.bitmover.com> Mail-Followup-To: Larry McVoy , Erwin Rol , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, RTAI users In-Reply-To: <1022317532.15111.155.camel@rawpower> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, May 25, 2002 at 11:05:32AM +0200, Erwin Rol wrote: > Both Linus and Larry seem to be not very interested in hard-realtime > Linux additions, this is OK. I'm interested in hard realtime. I'm extremely uninterested in changes to the mainline source base in order to get them. That's exactly why I like the RT/Linux approach so much, it is the least invasive to the kernel and - surprise - also has the best performance. If people were to learn that real time and multi-user throughput are by definition mutually exclusive, I'd be a lot happier. As it is, we have the SGI/Montevista crowd cramming their stuff into the kernel and each "little" thing makes the kernel a less pleasant place to be and brings it one step closer to the point when it gets abandoned like ever other OS in the history of our field. > Also apparently there is the idea that all RTAI developers want to > become rich by getting the patent out of the way and sell RTAI. So the thing I have a problem with is that Victor says that all GPL is fine. You say you are all GPL. So far, no problem. Yet you keep coming back and saying there is a problem, that Linux is going to be out of the running as a real time platform because of the patent. I don't get it, why should the patent prevent Linux from being used? All it does is say "if you aren't making money, we aren't making money, if you are making money, we want a cut". That seems OK to me, in fact, it seems more than OK. It seems like someone who is trying to help those who are helping others and charge those who are charging others. That's smart, that's good. It means that FSMlabs will be here 20 years from now, still supporting this stuff, whereas all the "we'll survive off of support" people will have long since gone under. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm