jfath...@aol.com wrote:It depends on your requirements. If you don't need real-time and
> Armin Steinhoff wrote:
>>AFAIS ... it should be very easy to port our QNX4 based
> My enthusiasm for Minix 3 derives from my own QNX 4 (POSIX microkernel)
threads, but a robust and secure micro kernel running on a single
CPU ... Minix 3.0 could be an alternative.
However ... Minix 3.0 is new and QNX is now ~20 years in the RTOS
> Please note that I have no dispute with QNX. They make a very fineDrivers for Minix 3.0 are not kernel modules ... so 'tainted drivers' is
> operating system and I enjoyed using it. I just want an open source
> alternative so I can master the internals (the technical appeal), and
> avoid licensing fees (the commercial appeal).
> Segin wrote:
>>Is this driver of yours comercially developed? And if so,
> Since Minix 3 is released under a BSD style license, there is no
> If someone develops generally useful code that runs under Minix 3, they
> Viral licensing such as the GPL is often a problem for commercial
not an issue for Minix 3.0. It is a real big problem with LINUX 2.x ...
as the recent discussion about a kernel driver API for LINUX shows.
LINUX is on the way to loose support for high tech hardware ... graphic
> The ability to hold source closed where warranted should encourageYes ... the contribution could be to open the doors for new areas of
> Minix 3 adoption, so users who select this path should be respected.
> They contribute in a useful, albeit less direct, manner.
applications of Minix 3.0.
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.