You do have a very good point about which kernel should be officially
supported.
Although the answer to your question ultimately spells a much longer
delay until the Cirrus kernel is stable, and then until TS develops
their own patchset.
If everyone on this list is waiting for something official, all that I
can say is please be patient. I have absolutely nothing to do with the
official kernel, and the same goes for anyone who is not an employee of
Cirrus or TS.
TS have said that they aren't interested in upgrading a kernel until
they have boards that could take advantage of RT and other features. I
don't blame them one bit actually, I just wanted to make it easier for
myself by not having to write kernel modules for 2.4 & 2.6, old
versions, devfs / udev, etc, etc. I just thought that if I could help
anyone else with that then I would be happy to.
Cirrus is working on their own forked kernel at the moment, in spite of
all of Lennart's code already being accepted into the main kernel tree.
Cirrus' code was supposedly done completely independent of Lennart's
work, although I noticed someone point out that Lennart's code is in
their kernel anyway ;-)
~/Chris
Don W. Carr wrote:
> Right, but it is not just the work involved, it is long term supporting
> another version of the kernel. TS can not just willy nilly support every
> incremental new version of the kernel and the support headaches it would
> cause. They should take it slow here and make sure that when they move to
> supporting 2.6, the time is right and it will be a version we can stick
> with
> for a long time. Even for end users, it is better to not have too many
> different kernels out there. I suspect, that with all of the new additions
> for real-time applications, that everything will come together before too
> long, and TS will start supporting 2.6. We just need to be patient . . . .
>
> On 5/31/07, Christopher Friedt <> wrote:
>>
>> It would take likely much less than that... aside from all of the
>> porting of device drivers, etc, of course ;-)
>>
>> ~/Chris
>>
>>
>> raaku66 wrote:
>> > I had a quote that put it at 40 hours
>> > To configure 2.6 for the 7400 board
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --- In <ts-7000%40yahoogroups.com>, "Stephen
>> Queen" <> wrote:
>> >> Depends on the costs. What would be the total estimated for
>> > Technologics to
>> >> do this development?
>> >>
>> >> Steve
>> >>
>> >> On 5/29/07, Ira Hoffman <> wrote:
>> >>> All,
>> >>>
>> >>> I've seen a lot of interest in running a 2.6 kernel on
>> > Technologics
>> >>> hardware in this group. We ourselves have interest in a 2.6
>> > kernel,
>> >>> especially for better thread support and more "real-time"
>> > capabilities.
>> >>> Perhaps, in the communal spirit, we should get a quote from
>> > Technologics
>> >>> on the work required and split the costs amongst all who desire
>> > this, in
>> >>> the group? Any thoughts?
>> >>>
>> >>> -Ira.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 11:15 +0200, Daniel Smolik wrote:
>> >>>> PeterElliot napsal(a):
>> >>>>> --- In <ts-7000%40yahoogroups.com>
>> <ts-7000%
>> > 40yahoogroups.com>, "raaku66"
>> >>> <raaku66@> wrote:
>> >>>>>> Is it possible T.S guys to get a definitive answer on if and
>> > when
>> >>>>> 2.6
>> >>>>>> will be supported for your boards,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> From what I've read from Technologic Systems tech guys on this
>> >>>> group.
>> >>>>> there is no intention to provide 2.6 on **CURRENT** boards.
>> >>>> However,
>> >>>>> a new board they are developing will probably be supplied
>> > with 2.6.
>> >>>>> If someone wanted 100s of one of the current boards and
>> > needed 2.6
>> >>>>> and were prepared to pay, then TS woule probably port 2.6 to
>> > that
>> >>>>> board, but I'd rather TS work on new an even better boards
>> > that
>> >>>> have
>> >>>>> features that would make more use of 2.6, and then move to the
>> >>>> newer
>> >>>>> boards with 2.6.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Regards,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> PJE
>> >>>> Thanks for info, but there is some bug in 2.4.x there are
>> > solved in
>> >>>> 2.6.x eg. usb serial ports support. I have running 2.6.18 with
>> > some
>> >>>> patches on TS-7250 and it work much better than 2.4.x for my
>> > usage.
>> >>>> Regards
>> >>>> Dan
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Ira Hoffman
>> >>> Director of Research and Development
>> >>> Freedom Sciences, LLC
>> >>> 610.585.7640
>> >>> <ihoffman%40freedomsciences.com>
>> >>> http://www.freedomsciences.com
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ts-7000/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ts-7000/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|