[...]
> > It was intended to promote discussion, and that seems to be working.
>
> Yeah, for me a bit of freak out Saturday that is still
> kind of happening since this has been a personal project
> of mine for a long time. :) I interpreted it as a visibility
> move on your company's part, which I hate to say is a bit
> unnerving to know that another group was doing the same
> work. TimeSys's Scott Wood and friends are doing something
> like this as well. I'm only being fair by mentioning them. :)
As you are mentioning TimeSys; they are distributing a modified kernel
with added realtime features, but do they also make the source available?
I know that they used to extend the kernel using a proprietary kernel
module; a clear violation of the GPL.
--ms
Martijn Sipkema wrote:
>[...]
>
>
>>>It was intended to promote discussion, and that seems to be working.
>>>
>>>
>>Yeah, for me a bit of freak out Saturday that is still
>>kind of happening since this has been a personal project
>>of mine for a long time. :) I interpreted it as a visibility
>>move on your company's part, which I hate to say is a bit
>>unnerving to know that another group was doing the same
>>work. TimeSys's Scott Wood and friends are doing something
>>like this as well. I'm only being fair by mentioning them. :)
>>
>>
>
>As you are mentioning TimeSys; they are distributing a modified kernel
>with added realtime features, but do they also make the source available?
>
>
Yes we do. We're releasing all of our 2.6.x work. Is there anything
you're having difficulty finding?
>I know that they used to extend the kernel using a proprietary kernel
>module; a clear violation of the GPL.
>
>
--
Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell's sig
On Wed, 2004-10-13 at 09:39, Martijn Sipkema wrote:
> As you are mentioning TimeSys; they are distributing a modified kernel
> with added realtime features, but do they also make the source available?
> I know that they used to extend the kernel using a proprietary kernel
> module; a clear violation of the GPL.
OK, obvious troll, but I'll bite...
How is this any different from what the Nvidia module does?
Lee
On Wed, 2004-10-13 at 11:56 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> OK, obvious troll, but I'll bite...
>
> How is this any different from what the Nvidia module does?
At least in theory, Nvidia uses only exported module interfaces.
The Timesys kernel touches the scheduler, among other things.
Robert Love