Daemon News Ezine BSD News BSD Mall BSD Support Forum BSD Advocacy BSD Updates

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Ping?

On Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 02:29:21PM +0200, aaron wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2001, Pat Villani wrote:
> > Actually, I think there are quite a few folks here, but activity is nil.
> > 
> > I have a broader question.  What is the demand for a real-time UNIX-like
> > operating system?  I know there are companies such as QNX and OS9 with
> > popular products, which I have experience with both, but my observations
> > have been that demand for others has not been high.  In fact, I get the
> > feeling that there has been a decline in demand for this type of
> > operating system.  This may seem somewhat off topic, but it questions
> > the value of a real-time FreeBSD project.  It may help explain why
> > traffic here is non-existent.
> Well I guess it would not hurt to have some things like low-latency
> patches, etc. (linux has that after all :)))
> I am sure it would make *BSD more useful. recently I had to program a
> sound "pacemaker" (i.e. a heartbeat .wav is sent to the soundcard
> regularly). So this is not real-time, BUT: since the rate was meant
> to change constantly (ranging from 33 bpm to 120), I could not use 
> /dev/rtc. Neither did the usleep() and nanosleep() function calls give me
> the precision which I wanted. signals were useless.
> Now some of you might wonder why I mention that sound not-even realtime
> simple project: because with sound output you can immediately feel if
> something is happening 100ms to late :)
> So, to sum it up: maybe its not a priority for freebsd but low latency
> things would sure make freebsd become more of a desktop multimedia OS
> (seems we are going in that direction anyway with all the KDE great
> stuff). Linux is going that way, why should not freebsd to some
> extent? --> some realtime capabilities would be great.

now that qnx has 'embraced' the "open software" movement and flung its
doors open and virtually given away most of the qnx 'sources' and the
other mob that donated its sources for integration into (as i
understand what i've seen on this question) openbsd.

maybe, freebsd as a whole would be better sticking what i "dose best"
that being a "multimedia desktop operating system" come server
platform. i say this as i've looked at the differences in qnx and os9,
and the 'realtime' linux/freebsd offerings ... apart from the lack of
'reliability' which only can be gotten by loging the historical hours.
from this aspect the real realtimers have already stolen the march from
the "johnny come-lately's" so to speak.

has anyone tried freebsd in a 'soft' realtime application, some war
stories would be appreciated. i've got sort of a 'report' come
recommendation to write about platform suitability and do not really
know about how much realtime capability is built into freebsd (kernel,
in particular).

from the people that i used to know, they all say to push the qnx
barrow ... is it worth looking at freebsd in the soft realtime
applications environment ? especially given the 'lack' of development in
the core areas that would be needed for sustainable realtime
operations, as seen from my perspective (which may be clouded by
many years of absence from this particular mines coal face).

with warm regards


Jonathan Michaels		       http://www.caamora.com.au
PO Box 144, Rosebery, NSW 1445	  suffering construction anxiety

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx
with "unsubscribe freebsd-realtime" in the body of the message