Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 5 Jun 2002 00:09:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 5 Jun 2002 00:09:25 -0400 Received: from dsl-213-023-043-246.arcor-ip.net ([213.23.43.246]:37047 "EHLO starship") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 5 Jun 2002 00:09:24 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Daniel Phillips To: J Sloan Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Adeos nanokernel for Linux kernel Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 06:08:57 +0200 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] Cc: linux kernel In-Reply-To:

<3CFD8C07.6030607@tmsusa.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 05 June 2002 05:56, J Sloan wrote: > Daniel Phillips wrote: > > >If I recall correctly, XFS makes an attempt to provide such realtime > >guarantees, or at least the Solaris version does. > > > When did Solaris ever support xfs? > > > However, the operating > >system must be able to provide true realtime guarantees in order for the > >filesystem to provide them, and I doubt that the combination of XFS and > >Solaris can do that. > > > no, but the combination of xfs and irix has ^^^^ Heh, I can only protest that Oxymoron also missed that thinko.. > made a lot of folks happy - and xfs/linux is coming along nicely as > well... Improving the average latency of systems is a worthy goal, and there's no denying that 'sorta realtime' has its place, however it's no substitute for the real thing. A soft realtime system screws up only on occasion, but - bugs excepted - a hard realtime system *never* does. -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/