any free OS for embedded system?
Huang Qiang
--
James
Department of Electrical Engineering and Electronics
University of Liverpool
Brownlow Hill
Liverpool L69 3GJ
UK
Lewin A.R.W. Edwards
system( except eCos)?
There's always NetBSD, and Linux.
--
-- Lewin A.R.W. Edwards
Personal http://www.larwe.com/ Work http://www.digi-frame.com/
"... a man who is endowed with real qualities of leadership will be tempted
to refrain from taking part in political life; because [...] the situation
does not call for a man who has a capacity for constructive statesmanship
but rather for a man who is capable of bargaining for the favour of the
majority. Thus the situation will appeal to small minds and will attract
them accordingly."
Radzisław Galler
"Huang Qiang" <jam...@liv.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:9dokbc$k2l$1...@news.liv.ac.uk...
> Does anybody know some of the free OS for embedded (multitaskable)
system( except eCos)?
> Thanks
> --
Yes. A few of them you will find here:
http://www.dedicated-systems.com/encyc/buyersguide/rtos/Dir228.html
Radek
Mike OBrien
"Huang Qiang" <jam...@liv.ac.uk> wrote in message news:9dokbc$k2l$1...@news.liv.ac.uk...
--------------------------------------------------------------------Hi James,Check out UCOS, by Jean LabrosseIt has been ported to many targets, is small and fast,maybe it will fit your need....It is free until you include it in a product for sale,than you need to get a license.Regards,Mike OBrien
Adib Taraben
uCOS is cheap but not free! But if you compare to something else, you
don't need to spend +2000US.
Adib.
--
Adib Taraben tara...@wige-mic.de
WIGE MIC Tel: +49 (0)341-4621/100
Wiesenring 11 Fax: +49 (0)341-4621/400
04469 LEIPZIG mail: off...@wige-mic.de
GERMANY WWW: www.wige-mic.de
CBFalconer
>
> Part 1.1 Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
> Encoding: quoted-printable
illegible, as is the OP. Don't use html, mime, or attachments in
newsgroups
--
Chuck F (cbfal...@my-deja.com) (cbfal...@XXXXworldnet.att.net)
http://www.qwikpages.com/backstreets/cbfalconer :=(down for now)
(Remove "NOSPAM." from reply address. my-deja works unmodified)
mailto:u...@ftc.gov (for spambots to harvest)
Mike OBrien
"Adib Taraben" <Tara...@wige-mic.de> wrote in message
news:3AFFEFD8...@wige-mic.de...
Hi,
From the ucoss-ii web page on licensing
"......no licensing is required if µC/OS and µC/OS-II is used for
educational use."
For educational, non-comercial use, it is FREE!
You need a license if you put it in a product for sale.
What solutions do you know of that are cheaper?
Please share your information....
--Mike
Grant Edwards
>
>> uCOS is cheap but not free! But if you compare to something else, you
>> don't need to spend +2000US.
>From the ucoss-ii web page on licensing
>"......no licensing is required if µC/OS and µC/OS-II is used for
>educational use."
>
>For educational, non-comercial use, it is FREE!
>
>You need a license if you put it in a product for sale.
>
>What solutions do you know of that are cheaper?
For commercial uses, eCos is cheaper:
http://sources.redhat.com/ecos
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! -- I can do
at ANYTHING... I can
visi.com even... SHOPLIFT!!
Lewin A.R.W. Edwards
> "......no licensing is required if µC/OS and µC/OS-II is used for
> educational use."
>
> What solutions do you know of that are cheaper?
Trick question??
Anything that charges money for any use is more expensive than something
that is unconditionally free.
To me, I'm doing commercially saleable products so it makes no difference if
they ream you up-front with an expensive development kit or after the fact
by charging royalties on the commercial use (in fact, I'd prefer the
one-time charge because I can amortize it). But neither of those options is
half as attractive as an open-source royalty-free OS like eCos, Linux or
NetBSD.
All the useful software dev support I get is peer support in newsgroups like
this one. Buyware is (in my experience) just a meal ticket for the vendor
with no benefit to me in terms of support or anything else. (Note that this
is for not-conceivably-life-threatening consumer applications. If I was
doing something "important" I would consider a buyware OS because it might
provide an additional legal cushion).
And don't get me started on "subscriptionware" with expiring license keys,
either. Screw that! I buy a piece of software, I expect it to work until I
need to upgrade to an OS that won't run my old version properly.
Pierre de Vos
Jeff Maass
commercial development. http://www.qnx.com
Regards,
--
Jeff Maass jma...@columbus.rr.com Located near Columbus Ohio
USPSA # L-1192 NROI/CRO Amateur Radio K8ND
Maass' IPSC Resources Page: http://home.columbus.rr.com/jmaass
"Huang Qiang" <jam...@liv.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:9dokbc$k2l$1...@news.liv.ac.uk...
Scott Moore
Huang Qiang wrote:
--
"I'd like to see cpp abolished" - Bjarne Stroustrup
Jonathan M Hill
package named CTASK. I saved the READ.ME file from the package,
just in case.
Here are a few lines from the READ.ME file. While the terms do
seem encouraging, I have never heard anyone this kernel. I do
apolagize, I have not tried it and cannot say anything either
way about it.
My impression is that CTASK was written for a DOS/PC environment,
but I may be wrong. For more information, consider looking here.
http://iserver.ivc.cc.ca.us/faculty/dehrlich/Guide/CAT-011.HTM
Jonathan Hill
jmh...@ece.wpi.edu
=========================================================================
CTask - A Multitasking Kernel for C.
Version 2.2d, Released 93-06-08.
Public Domain Software written by Thomas Wagner
Internet: twa...@bix.com
BIX: twagner
Compuserve: 100023,2042
*** NOTE: ADDRESS CHANGE! ***
Business Address:
Ferrari electronic GmbH
Ruhlsdorfer Strasse 138
D-14513 Teltow
Germany
This software is in the Public Domain. No registration is required,
and no license fees or royalties must be paid.
You are using this software at your own risk. There is no warranty on
fitness for any purpose, and the author can not be held liable for
any damages whatsoever.
Re-distribution by any media, disk or BBS, is expressly encouraged.
Please distribute freely, but please leave the archives intact when
re-posting. If there is a technical need to split up the archives,
please include this read.me with all parts, and tell the user where
to find the other parts.
: Does anybody know some of the free OS for embedded (multitaskable) =
: system( except eCos)?
: Thanks
:
: James
Edward S Brian
"Huang Qiang" <jam...@liv.ac.uk> wrote in message news:9dokbc$k2l$1...@news.liv.ac.uk...
Paul Burke
>
> I use uC/OS and like it, but besides that, I do recall seeing a
> package named CTASK. I saved the READ.ME file from the package,
> just in case.
>
CTASK is excellent, very small footprint and lots of facilities, also
full source. And Borland C++ development environment. Its main drawback
is that it lives on top of DOS. I haven't been able so far to get it to
work with FreeDOS.
Does anyone know what became of Thomas Wagner? (I asked this question I
think about 6 months ago). Nothing seems to have happened to CTASK since
about 1995, and Wagner's comapny, Ferrari GMBH, doesn't seem to exist
anymore.
Paul Burke
Mike OBrien
"Grant Edwards" <gra...@visi.com> wrote in message
news:ZTTL6.788$Dd5.5...@ruti.visi.com...
> In article <tg0281l...@corp.supernews.com>, Mike OBrien wrote:
> >
> >> uCOS is cheap but not free! But if you compare to something else, you
> >> don't need to spend +2000US.
>
> >From the ucoss-ii web page on licensing
> >educational use."
> >
> >For educational, non-comercial use, it is FREE!
> >
> >You need a license if you put it in a product for sale.
> >
> >What solutions do you know of that are cheaper?
>
> For commercial uses, eCos is cheaper:
I agree
will eCos work on an 8051, or an 68HC11????
I use these a lot, so I am curious.
--Mike
Mike OBrien
"Lewin A.R.W. Edwards" <la...@larwe.com> wrote in message
news:d2UL6.59226$Rg2.2...@typhoon2.ba-dsg.net...
> > From the ucoss-ii web page on licensing
> > educational use."
> > You need a license if you put it in a product for sale.
> >
> > What solutions do you know of that are cheaper?
>
> Trick question??
>
> Anything that charges money for any use is more expensive than something
> that is unconditionally free.
>
<snip>
I agree, You use what works best.....
depending on what is needed.
the OP did not state what they were trying to do.....
In my case I code for small 8-bit micro's
I do not need a large collection of features
just basic multi-tasking, mutual exclusion,
event-task synchronization, Interrupt Handlers,
and stream i/o.
I either use free software, I write it myself,
or I buy tools (one time fee), such as compilers
assemblers, debuggers, emulators, or OS kernels
Why?
Time to market, faster is better, and cheaper then
investing months of effort.
Paying royalties is not for me!
....."subscriptionware" with expiring license keys,
No way would I go for that either...
Regards,
Mike
Alf Katz
"Lewin A.R.W. Edwards" <la...@larwe.com> wrote in message
news:d2UL6.59226$Rg2.2...@typhoon2.ba-dsg.net...
> Anything that charges money for any use is more expensive than something
> that is unconditionally free.
Not if it costs me less in total to implement than the "free" solution.
--
Regards,
Alf Katz,
alf...@removethis.ieee.org
Grant Edwards
>
>"Grant Edwards" <gra...@visi.com> wrote in message
>news:ZTTL6.788$Dd5.5...@ruti.visi.com...
>> In article <tg0281l...@corp.supernews.com>, Mike OBrien wrote:
>> >
>> >> uCOS is cheap but not free! But if you compare to something else, you
>> >> don't need to spend +2000US.
>>
>> >From the ucoss-ii web page on licensing
>> >educational use."
>> >
>> >For educational, non-comercial use, it is FREE!
>> >
>> >You need a license if you put it in a product for sale.
>> >
>> >What solutions do you know of that are cheaper?
>>
>> For commercial uses, eCos is cheaper:
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> I agree
>
>will eCos work on an 8051, or an 68HC11????
eCos has been written for the Gnu/gcc toolchain with the
assumption that an "int" is 32 bits. The minimum footprint is
probably about 40K (no networking, minimal features).
In theory: yes, you could port gcc to an 8-bit microcontroller
such that an int is 32 bits, and run eCos.
In practice: no.
>I use these a lot, so I am curious.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Quick, sing me the
at BUDAPEST NATIONAL ANTHEM!!
visi.com
Marius Groeger
>
> To me, I'm doing commercially saleable products so it makes no difference if
> they ream you up-front with an expensive development kit or after the fact
> by charging royalties on the commercial use (in fact, I'd prefer the
> one-time charge because I can amortize it). But neither of those options is
> half as attractive as an open-source royalty-free OS like eCos, Linux or
> NetBSD.
Thats true. However, not everybody has your level of expertise with complex
systems such as Linux or NetBSD. If you're a Unix newbie, these OSes can
bring you extra costs hidden in your engineer's learning curve. It is
important to realize that upfront and consider buying professional support
and consultance, even for software that is open source and free of charge.
Missing your deadlines is usually A LOT more expensive.
--mag
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marius Groeger SYSGO Real-Time Solutions GmbH www.sysgo.de
Software Engineering Embedded and Real-Time Software www.osek.de
mgroeger @ sysgo de Germany www.elinos.com
Lewin A.R.W. Edwards
fact
> > by charging royalties on the commercial use (in fact, I'd prefer the
> > one-time charge because I can amortize it). But neither of those options
is
> > half as attractive as an open-source royalty-free OS like eCos, Linux or
>
complex
> systems such as Linux or NetBSD. If you're a Unix newbie, these OSes can
> bring you extra costs hidden in your engineer's learning curve. It is
> important to realize that upfront and consider buying professional support
> and consultance, even for software that is open source and free of charge.
> Missing your deadlines is usually A LOT more expensive.
While it is true, I don't think this comment is germane to the original
question.
1. Semantic issue. When someone asks for pointers to "free OSs" I take
"free" to mean "no money changes hands for any use of the OS". This
definition excludes any product with any kind of license that requires
paying money. So an OS that is "free until you decide to distribute a
product based around it" is NOT free and it is not an answer to the original
poster's question.
By the definition of "free" you're trying to construct here, there are no
free OSs at all, because the only truly free OS would be one where the
developer pays you to learn about it. And I fully agree that it always costs
time(=money) to implement any OS. But this falls outside the discussion of
money changing hands for OS source or rights to use the OS, so it is a side
issue, not a core point.
2. ANY OS - buyware or freeware - has a learning curve. For an in-house OS
this learning curve is ascended during the development of the OS. For an OS
I download off the web, there is documentation and sourcecode to read. There
is no reason to believe that buyware OSs are inherently architecturally
easier to understand than free OSs.
As I indicated in my earlier post, my experience thus far has been that the
money charged for buyware OSs is not reflected in the quality of developer
support provided; in other words, the money I pay does not gain me anything
better than the free peer support in forums like this one. Microsoft is an
easy target to illustrate this point; their "developer support" (at least
when I was working in Australia) seemed to consist entirely of them
searching the MSDN CD-ROM and providing article numbers that I was easily
capable of finding myself. At least half my work time at my previous job was
reverse-engineering DOS and Windows to get answers to questions MS dev
support was incapable/unwilling to answer.
If you are advocating outsourcing the entire learning curve and buying the
OS as a black box that nobody inside the company understands, then the
English language does not contain sufficiently vehement words for me to
express adequately my disagreement with you. Again, almost every time I've
said "We/I don't have time to do X, let's outsource it", the result has been
one of:
A. the product has needed updating after the outside contractor has vanished
B. the job has been done in an immediately substandard fashion and after
several attempts to get the supplier to fix it, an in-house version has had
to be produced anyway, or
C. the outsourced component has been hard to integrate and harder to update
In all cases, much duplicate/unnecessary work was created. There is no
adequate substitute for in-house expertise (except maybe for the mythical
product that "just works" out of the box and will never be updated; if
you're doing one of those, then buy all the black boxes you want).
Even in my current job, we had to outsource a (relatively tiny!) piece of
code (host-side software for Windows). After dealing with some 80+ end-user
complaints, I finally had to spend a weekend rewriting the piece of code
from scratch. I am not the world's best Win32 app-level programmer, so I
don't understand why an outside entity needs $n,000 and MONTHS of dev time
to produce a piece of code that doesn't work properly. It's experiences like
these that lead me to prefer to work 18-hour days than outsource.
Lewin A.R.W. Edwards
> > that is unconditionally free.
>
> Not if it costs me less in total to implement than the "free" solution.
Please refer to my reply to Marius... although I agree about the whole
cost-of-implementing issue, I don't feel it was relevant to this thread.
Marius Groeger
> > bring you extra costs hidden in your engineer's learning curve. It is
>
> product based around it" is NOT free and it is not an answer to the original
> poster's question.
Definitely true. Anything with licences or royalties won't (and shoudn't)
work here.
> By the definition of "free" you're trying to construct here, there are no
> free OSs at all, because the only truly free OS would be one where the
> developer pays you to learn about it. And I fully agree that it always costs
But that is exactly my point. You'd be surprised how many people are simply
blinded by the fact that Linux (for instance) is fee (of charge) and don't
realize how little they know about it.
> As I indicated in my earlier post, my experience thus far has been that the
> money charged for buyware OSs is not reflected in the quality of developer
> support provided; in other words, the money I pay does not gain me anything
I beg to differ. I agree with you about Microsoft support, but I'd consider
that off topic in this discussion and this group. ;-)
> If you are advocating outsourcing the entire learning curve and buying the
> OS as a black box that nobody inside the company understands, then the
> English language does not contain sufficiently vehement words for me to
> express adequately my disagreement with you. Again, almost every time I've
No, that was not my point. What I tried to say is merely that getting a very
complex though free OS may involve additional training of your staff. Don't
you think there's a difference to train a pSOS-newbie in pSOS vs. a
UNIX-newbie in UNIX? I'm advocating pro free OSes, pro Linux, and pro
keeping your know-how in house, but I'm also trying to point out that
the hype sometimes impairs people's calculations.
sr
wrote:
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Please, don't use formatted text in Usenet articles.
It wastes more than twice the bandwidth, and isn't readable by
all newsreaders. Thanks.
>Does anybody know some of the free OS for embedded (multitaskable) =
>system( except eCos)?
>Thanks
There are lots of Linux variants; look for them at www.freeos.com
For example, ELKS fits on a 720 diskette and runs on 8088 systems.
IMO, another new one worth a look is at http://rome.sourceforge.net/
HTH
--
sr - null...@PAMflashnet.it <strip NOS & PAM to email>