Re: Why not NetBSD?

From: Don (none_at_given)
Date: 12/22/04

  • Next message: Mike Monett: "Re: what's a callback?" 
    Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:47:29 -0700

    Richard Saunders <rsaund@hotpop.com> wrote in message
    news:-sudnVlGg6ZVZVjcRVn-pQ@speakeasy.net...
    > I'm looking to build a reasonably-sophisticated embedded device, and was
    > originally thinking of using Linux. While poking around for info, I
    > also did some looking at NetBSD. From what I can see, NetBSD is:
    >
    > - designed from scratch for portability

    Yes. Portions of NBSD's development have definitely lagged
    those of FreeBSD, Linux, etc. specifically because of this
    emphasis on portability. I think the FreeBSD camp has paid
    a price for tailoring early releases to the i86 platform in that
    adding other platforms *now* seems to be a bit more of a
    painful process (i.e. why don't they have support for dozens of
    platforms?)

    > - seems to be easier to use for embedded systems

    I think the fact that multiplatform products tend to require cross
    development efforts just to build themselves means you've got
    people already thinking along this track. A product developed
    on a PC to *run* on a PC can cut a lot of corners -- e.g., reboot
    with new kernel and see how it works.

    > - has a more flexible and determinate licensing scheme

    Yes. More of the Berkeley style licensing. My clients *cringe*
    when presented with the idea of building on a Linux core -- almost
    as badly as a MS-based approach. There is also a *perception*
    that Linux is more fluid, implying less *stable* (i.e. how many
    kernel releases have their been? are each of these releases fully
    characterized? Or, have they just "moved on" with changes -- and
    *new*, undiscovered bugs...?)

    As a result of this client bias, I can't speak first-hand of the
    *realities* of their codebase and/or its quality (flames > /dev/null)
    I've learned its usually not worthwhile to try to "educate" a client
    to adopt something that he is inherently wary of (anything goes
    wrong, the "I-told-you-so's" can be BRUTAL!)

    > However, I'm suspicious as I see a lot of activity around embedded
    > Linux, but much less around NetBSD. What am I missing? I'm hoping that
    > the learned members of this group can shed a little light on embedding
    > NetBSD vs. Linux.

    There are products designed around NBSD. They just don't
    pimp the OS like the folks using Linux distros do.

    There are other UN*X-like platforms that are, perhaps, better
    suited to embedded work. Note that most of the free eunices
    have a VERY heavy footprint. And, even those that purport
    to have (pseudo) real time capabilities have gaping holes
    in their RT support (i.e how many have true RT TCP/IP stacks??)

    Good luck!
    --don

  • Next message: Mike Monett: "Re: what's a callback?"