Re: Roadblocks to further widespread adoption of NetBSD in embedded systems (at least in my neck of the woods)
Masao Uebayashi <[email protected]> Sat, 27 Mar 2010 13:29:50 +0900
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.embedded |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 3:49 AM, Jack Atkinson <[email protected]> wrote: > Greetings NetBSD developers, > > This is my first time posting here, so go easy on me. The past few years, > my former employer and now client, has been going through a struggle of how > best to move from their proprietary OS/RTOS to a commercial OS. I've helped > with a lot of research in this issue. The two biggest contenders at the > moment are Linux and QNX. QNX is the strong favorite, but negotiations are > not going well of late. A lot people dread the Linux GPL, but love the > plentiful driver support out there for most of our processors (mainly > PowerQuic I & PowerQuicc Pro with some MIPS) and other peripherals currently > on existing hardware. I want to beat QNX. Seriously. > I personally like what I see of the overall design of the NetBSD kernel and > the build system. The few times I've dipped into the source, I have been > impressed with the layout and organization of it. I prefer the BSD license > over GPL, because BSD really is a free license in every meaning of the word > free. However, I cannot recommend NetBSD to them at this time, because of > these areas that are lacking: > > (listed by highest priority) > 1. Official PowerQuicc support in the NetBSD tree along with drivers for CPM > module. (PowerPC is not quite the same, but a good starting point) Our overall design of SoC support is not good. We need huge improvement here. > 2. No flash support for NOR flash (NAND lacking is well, but NOR is more > important for this company based on current deployed hardware) > 3. Better remote debugging over ethernet (kernel included). I may be wrong > on this, but I haven't seen a lot of info on how to do this for NetBSD. > 4. Ability to build a small kernel with small subset of userland utilities > much like BusyBox on Linux, but not GPL. My goal is to provide a nice build interface to build 1MB kernel & 1MB userland. Those embedded developers should not edit ugly config files and "list" file for crunched binaries. Masao