This is the mail archive of the ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the eCos project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: ECOS - MIPS


People may have positive and negative comments about a SW product. Does this 
group for only positive ones ? Or only positive questions ? 

I have been writing SW for about 10 years. I have just examined eCOS and found 
that it is configurable on some way and unconfigurable ( hard to reconfigure 
) on some way. May be it is much more configurable than the existing ones but 
not a super really configurable OS. 

I am the user. This is a user point of view . Having a seperate HAL layer or a 
structured file tree doesnt make an operating system really configurable. 
Configurability means to change the operating system according to your needs 
in a quick way : not being able to change it in a month... 

configurable modern SW is done with SW patterns. Architectural and Design 
patterns makes SW configurable, easy to change, etc... Embedded SW needs good 
architectural design with really reusable architectural and design patterns. 
What makes JAVA popular is these points. It is a programming framework that 
fullfills these points.

eCOS is  not a really framework. When you read the documentation, it seems to 
be an OS framework but indeed it doesn't. 

What i try to mean is we must make it better in order to make it usable in the 
future. 


ÃarÅamba 22 Haziran 2005 09:28 Ãs tarihinde, L D ÅunlarÄ yazmÄÅtÄ: 
> --- "K. Sinan YILDIRIM" <sinany@beko.com.tr> wrote:
> > i dont understand why ecos restricts its users with
> > a configtool and
>
>   Have you actually used it the way it was meant to be
> used? You have to learn the _ecos_ way of doing
> things, there is no shortcuts (unless you pay someone
> [not me] to do the work) !.
>
> > templates. i want a clean makefile and module
> > structure.
>
>   What is so unclean about eCos? eCos is more than a
> collection of .cxx files held together by makefiles.
> It is a collection of reconfigurable reusable
> components and this is where the cdl (component
> definition language) comes in. Take a look at his link
> http://www.embedded.com/story/OEG20011220S0059
>   its few years old but it is also nice and _short_.
>
> > not structuring with
> > a config tool or hardware environment. it is really
> > diffucult to add or
> > remove a new file. also many files are coupled each
> > other.
>
>   You add and remove files by adding the filename to
> the a cdl file. That is not harder than editing a
> makefile.
>
> > i have a board that implements mips core and
> > different to atlas board. there
> > must be a clean version of ecos that includes pure
> > mips dependencies. atlas
>
>   There is no such thing as "pure" mips. Why don't you
>  just give us more details about your board. It is
> much more productive than making negative inaccurate
> comments about eCos. This is how it normally works
> around here. You ask a question, give the relevant
> details and hope that someone can help.
>
> > dependencies makes people to change their OS
> > choice...
> >
> > does anyone think that it is really configurable ?
>
>   Hello! Its called configurable for a good reason!


--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]