Subject: Re: Real Time O.S vs 'conventional' one.
To: Zafer Aydogan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Timo Schoeler <email@example.com>
Date: 10/26/2005 14:23:49
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:18:45 +0200 (MEST)
"Zafer Aydogan" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > --- Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht ---
> > Von: "Stefan 'Kaishakunin' Schumacher" <email@example.com>
> > An: Marcin Jessa <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > Kopie: NetBSD-embed <tech-embed@NetBSD.org>, NetBSD-net
> > <email@example.com>
> > Betreff: Re: Real Time O.S vs 'conventional' one.
> > Datum: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 13:17:52 +0200
> > Also sprach Marcin Jessa (firstname.lastname@example.org)
> > =20
> > > I have embedded boards which I want to use as acess points for WLAN
> > > infrastructure.
> > > The choice is between NetBSD and Real Time Linux.
> > > What I am wondering about is if there is any advantage using real
> > > time O.S on wireless enviroment.=20
> That depends. If you want to run a business, then you don't want to run
> NetBSD at all, at least not right now, because it is buggy and under heavy
(besides the massive x-posting: am i missing <irony> </irony> tags? aren't =
several commercial products using NetBSD or based upon it?)
> If it is just for your home environment, you can give it a try.
> > So my advice is NetBSD, don't forget, it holds the Internet2 Land
> > Speed Record :-)
> It had held the speed record once. Linux has broken it a couple times.
hm, i think then it's time to do it again? ;)