Slashdot Mirror


Linux To Gain Another Chip Family

An anonymous reader submits "Freescale will unveil the first ColdFire processors ever to include a memory management unit (MMU), and therefore able to run full-scale Linux, this week at the Embedded Processor Forum in San Jose, Calif. The chips cost $17 - $25, and are used mostly in industrial control and factory automation. Simultaneously, Freescale tools subsidiary Metrowerks announced plans to offer Linux development tools for Coldfire chips, which previously had been restricted to running uClinux due to the lack of an MMU."

141 comments

  1. New Amigas by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 4, Informative

    These chips, distantly related to the 68k motorolas, were once touted as a possible upgrade path for new Amigas in the mid 1990s. Hopefully with these new ones, the more modern AmigaOS4 can be ported to them, and continue the heritage. At the moment the only stock available is AmigaOne G3, G4 and mini-itx PPC boards, which are artificially inflated in price by the apple/ibm/motorola consortium.

    1. Re:New Amigas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      > Hopefully with these new ones, the more modern AmigaOS4
      > can be ported to them

      You can't "port" something that hasn't been written yet!

      6 years now and all promises :(

    2. Re:New Amigas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      which are artificially inflated in price by the apple/ibm/motorola consortium.

      Surely you mean there wasn't the demand from people wanting to buy them for a dead platform, therefore no demand = higher price.

    3. Re:New Amigas by Blue+Lang · · Score: 1

      which are artificially inflated in price

      What? Niche products costing more? Yeah, that sounds pretty artificial.

      --
      i browse at -1 because they're funnier than you are.
    4. Re:New Amigas by Blue+Lang · · Score: 1

      Freescale's ColdFire line comprises 8-, 16-, and 32-bit processors. Significantly, the MCF547x and MCF548x ColdFire chips announced today are the first in the ColdFire architecture to be based on Freescale's new V4e core, which includes an on-chip MMU. The new ColdFire processors are capable of delivering up to 410 MIPS (million instructions per second) at 266 MHz, according to Freescale.

      haha. yes, please DO run your amigaOS @ 410MIPS.

      --
      i browse at -1 because they're funnier than you are.
    5. Re:New Amigas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      AmigaOS 4 could run rings around any other OS even at 266MHz. Its core is still based in the idea of efficiency. Remember the days when a 25mhz machine was fast? Those days are still there. Now the OS that ran well on 25mhz can run at 266, or 500, or 1GHz, and enjoy the same multiples in speed.

      XP on a 3.4GHz P4? Still a slug

    6. Re:New Amigas by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well how about open motherboard designs? Is anyone working on this sort of thing? I know about the Open Core projects, but it's be neat to make a little computer from scratch.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    7. Re:New Amigas by mandolin · · Score: 1
      These chips, distantly related to the 68k motorolas

      Can you elaborate. I thought ColdFire was basically a 68060 w/out an MMU. Does it have new instructions -- or strip out a few -- compared to 68k, (like the Power->PowerPC transition)? What else is different?

    8. Re:New Amigas by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 4, Informative

      which are artificially inflated in price by the apple/ibm/motorola consortium.

      It appears that way when in reality, that probably is an exercise in comparing bananas and oranges.

      Development Evaluation / Reference Design boards are generally higher in price because of their volume, and the fact that they have different levels of support, often times, software, documents and engineering support is available to them for this type of product. Products intended for a slightly different market, the embedded market, are often slightly cheaper but don't always fit the "standard" form factors like ATX and ITX, but they weren't meant to be used as personal computers, so that point is moot, although it would probably help prices and cut development costs a lot.

      The idea is that a prospective manufacturer would buy the Devel board to test the capabilities of the overall system. When they want volume, they take the reference design as a basis for their own fabrication and and make it in volume, but often for proprietary form factors to fit a very specific task.

      One thing I noticed is that reference boards for Intel and AMD chips often cost a little more than those for RISC chips. If the ARM board costs $600, a similar embedded reference board for an x86 chip often costed $700 to $800. The difference here is that there are plenty of consumer boards available for x86 systems, but not RISC systems, so this is where the RISC boards look expensive.

    9. Re:New Amigas by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 1

      IBM seems well positioned to drive this. Well, maybe not at this time, but I'd like to see them involved in such an effort.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    10. Re:New Amigas by Detritus · · Score: 1

      If I remember correctly, they junked the binary compatibility with the 68K series of chips. This allowed them to redesign the binary level instruction formats and instruction decoder circuits. They kept compatibility at the assembly language level, just reassemble your 68K source code with a new ColdFire assembler.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    11. Re:New Amigas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you remember wrong. The ColdFire instruction set is a *subset* of 68k. Mostly it's the rarely-used multi-word instructions that have complicated addressing modes that have been removed. This was an attempt to RISCify a CISCy instruction set.

      You can sort-of run 68k binaries, by trapping on the instructions that are illegal in ColdFire and then emulating them. Motorola offers CF68KLIB for this purpose.

    12. Re:New Amigas by Breakfast+Cereal · · Score: 2, Funny
      SunOS 4.1.2 ran pretty well at 25 MHz. I remember the days when an 8 MHz machine was fast. You had to press this button marked TURBO, as if you're sitting there thinking, Gosh, this machine is just dog slow! What can I do to make it go faster? Wait, I know! I'll press the TURBO button!

      I remember days from before those days, too. I remember many different days. But I don't remember the Amiga except for some stuff about video toaster special effects I saw at a science fiction convention one time. Where was I going with this? I don't know, but what the hell.

    13. Re:New Amigas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      therefore no demand = higher price

      Wat skool u go 2? No 1 want 2 by, no ken ask menny $.

    14. Re:New Amigas by Publicus · · Score: 1

      You'll be able to get development kits for this platform that fit the mini-itx form factor.

      One type kit.

      disclaimer: I work for that company.

      --

      My Karma was at 49, then they switched to words. All that work for nothing!

    15. Re:New Amigas by nova20 · · Score: 1
      Gosh, this machine is just dog slow! What can I do to make it go faster? Wait, I know! I'll press the TURBO button!

      Though most of the time that would make the machine run *slower* because most people would enable turbo out of the box...

      /nova20

    16. Re:New Amigas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What ??? Do you really follow Amiga news or not ? Working AmigaOS 4 is regularly shown in many Amiga shows, and it's first public version will be sent to AmigaOne users wery soon.

      AmigaOS 4 CD's were already duplicated, now we just wait that Hyperion gets those back from dublicators so that they can send CD's to current Amigaone users.

      This first public version is called AmigaOS Developer pre-release, so it is not the final version yet. But you don't have to be developer, every current AmigaOne owner will get it. If you are registered AmigaOne owner you will get OS4 pre-release version automatically.

  2. Why is this so important? by raahul_da_man · · Score: 3, Informative

    I thought I knew which processors were important in the embedded world. What exactly is Coldfire, and why does it matter compare to ARM and Motorola's offerings?

    I realise that Yet Another Embedded Processor that can run all of linux is a good thing. I just don't see why that is important, since the difference between embedded and desktop processors has been diminishing sharply.

    1. Re:Why is this so important? by zalas · · Score: 1

      I believe Coldfire IS one of Motorola's offerings. The digital cable equipment company I worked at was using those for a variety of applications.

    2. Re:Why is this so important? by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1
      I think ColdFire compares quite well with some of Motorola's offerings.

      Also I think that the PowerPC compares quite well with some chips from IBM, the Athlon compares well to certain chips from AMD, and the micro-n-SP is equivalent in power to several chips from SunPlus. :-)

    3. Re:Why is this so important? by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1
      Well er um it isn't!

      I fail to see the real point in a Coldfire. What can it do that an ARM or whatever can't? A lot of the justification for Coldfire was for the Motorola zealots to move to something other than 68k (you'd be suprised how many engineering companies will only use Motorola). A lot moved to PPC. It is exceedingly hard for Motorola to justify an extra architecture in between 68k and PPC - more so still since Motorola has also started making ARM-based parts.

      --
      Engineering is the art of compromise.
    4. Re:Why is this so important? by jejones · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The ColdFire is a 680x0 with the instruction set constrained in some ways (the number of instruction extensions is limited so that not all the combinations of addressing modes one is used to on the 680x0 are available for all instructions, arithmetic operations are all 32-bit rather than having 8-bit and 16-bit flavors as well) and extended in others (to compensate for the restrictions on arithmetic operations, there are load with sign extend and load with zero extend). Also, the ColdFire will trap on unaligned moves, unlike the 680x0 (68020 and above will cheerfully do unaligned moves, and even the 68000 only insists on 2-byte alignment for 4-byte moves).

      The result of all this is to make the CPU more "RISC-like" and allow more efficient operation, but it also means that moving from 680x0 to ColdFire is a serious port--you definitely won't be able to just move 680x0 code over and run it.

    5. Re:Why is this so important? by corngrower · · Score: 1
      I fail to see the real point in a Coldfire


      IIRC, the coldfire has been around for about 8 or 9 years (possibly longer). I don't think it was ever really popular. I think it was really marketed the same way that ARM markets the ARM cpu, as an IP core around which chip designers can design embedded controllers.

    6. Re:Why is this so important? by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1
      I don't think this is quite true, though I bet Motorola wishes it was :-).

      As far as I can tell the only places you'll see Coldfire is in Motorola parts or ASICs made for people by Motorola (probably very few of those).

      In the 90's the 8051 core was used by just about everyone for various embedded micros. ARM is set to be the "new 8051".

      --
      Engineering is the art of compromise.
  3. Metrowerks by lakeland · · Score: 2, Informative
    Freescale tools subsidiary Metrowerks


    Huh? Metrowerks produces apple development tools, and they dabble in linux/embedded development tools. I'm pretty sure that Metrowerks is not a freescale subsidary. See for example this PR.

    1. Re:Metrowerks by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Founded in 1985, Metrowerks is today an independently operating subsidiary of Freescale Semiconductor. Metrowerks corporate headquarters are in Austin, Texas; Metrowerks Europe is headquartered in Munich; Metrowerks Asia is headquartered in Singapore; and Metrowerks Japan is headquartered in Tokyo.


      In turn, freescale is a subsidiary of motorola. Source (27 April 2004)
    2. Re:Metrowerks by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Informative

      Huh? Metrowerks produces apple development tools, and they dabble in linux/embedded development tools. I'm pretty sure that Metrowerks is not a freescale subsidary. See for example this PR.

      1 - Metrowerks is a Freescale "early tester", i.e. they get Freescale stuff first

      2 - Metrowerks acquired Lineo and their Embedix Linux offering a while ago, and offer it as one of their core products. Therefore, they more than "dabble" in Linux.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    3. Re:Metrowerks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well Motorola thinks that it owns Freescale, and Freescale owns Metrowerks. Just google "motorola freescale metrowerks" and hit "I'm Feeling Lucky".

      reference

      "Freescale's scalable PowerPC SoC platforms are supported by its Metrowerks subsidiary"; "Freescale Semiconductor, Inc [...] a subsidiary of Motorola, Inc [...]"

      And for another opinion: reference

      "Metrowerks is a wholly owned subsidiary of Freescale, which, in turn, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Motorola"

    4. Re:Metrowerks by Roland+Piquepaille · · Score: 1

      In turn, freescale is a subsidiary of motorola. Source (27 April 2004) Freescale is the new name of Motorola SPS, hence the reason Freescale itself is a subsidiary of Motorola.

    5. Re:Metrowerks by Megane · · Score: 2, Interesting
      In turn, freescale is a subsidiary of motorola.

      Yeah, it was weird going down Parmer Road last week and noticing the Circle-M wasn't there any more. It took me a moment before I realized what those "Freescale" signs meant.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    6. Re:Metrowerks by d4rkmoon · · Score: 1

      Actually, Freescale isn't a subsidiary. Motorola SPS is being spun off as a separate company (thus they're filing SEC filings for an IPO). They're only being held as a subsidiary for the time being while papers are being filed. And since when was Metrowerks a subsidiary of Freescale? Founded in 1985 in Montreal, Canada, Metrowerks moved its corporate headquarters to Austin, Texas ten years later. Other Metrowerks offices are located in Silicon Valley, Europe, India and Tokyo. Metrowerks became an independently operating subsidiary of Motorola in September of 1999. (http://www.metrowerks.com/MW/About/default.htm)

      --
      -- Friends don't let friends buy Nokia.
    7. Re:Metrowerks by d4rkmoon · · Score: 1

      Metrowerks also wrote many many development tools for linux/embedded. Take for example: Embedded linux for Motorola phones? Also, the development kit for PS2 and many gaming consoles. They've been around ever since I can remember for great development tools (remember Codewarrior?)

      And the only reason they get Freescale things first is because they're all Motorolan to some degree.

      --
      -- Friends don't let friends buy Nokia.
    8. Re:Metrowerks by kinshadow · · Score: 1

      IAAFE (I Am A Freescale Employee), and I can tell you:
      1. Freescale (formerly SPS) is a subsidiary of Motorola and plans to spin-off.
      2. Metrowerks is a subsidiary of Freescale (which means it was formerly a subsidiary of MotoSPS) and will remain so (AFAIK) after the spin-off.
      Thus, currently, Metrowerks is a subsidiary of a subsidiary.

      --
      Sigpilot : I'm in the pipe, 5 by 5.
    9. Re:Metrowerks by d4rkmoon · · Score: 1

      That's interesting. Didn't pay much attention to Metrowerks except it was a subsidiary of Motorola. And btw, IAAME. Heheh... GO figure that out. :p

      --
      -- Friends don't let friends buy Nokia.
  4. motorola by Coneasfast · · Score: 4, Informative

    freescale is a subsidiary of motorola, here is homepage for coldfire.

    --
    Marge, get me your address book, 4 beers, and my conversation hat.
  5. But..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny
    Can it run Linux????

    Wait a minute.....

  6. Great, I can use them by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I want to build a low cost Computer Automated Dispatch system with just the basics for low income firehouses, police stations, and hospitals. This chip might just fit the bill. I was going to go with Transmeta or a low end X86 processor.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    1. Re:Great, I can use them by DAldredge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Mission critical systems and first generation chips are not a good match.

    2. Re:Great, I can use them by irokitt · · Score: 1

      Cool idea. I, on the other hand, am entertaining grandiose dreams of alarm clocks, coffee makers, stereos, and microwave ovens. The limits are endless. Yes, it CAN run Linux ;)

      --
      If my answers frighten you, stop asking scary questions.
    3. Re:Great, I can use them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering that the first 68k processors were developed in the 1970's and that the Coldfire variant is over ten years old, I don't think it's entirely accurate to call this a "first-generation" chip...

    4. Re:Great, I can use them by bhima · · Score: 1
      I think you will find low end X86 to work quite well.

      Unfortunatly I still find the tranmetta offerings a bit to pricey (but then again I don't have real issues with battery life with my projects!)

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    5. Re:Great, I can use them by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking of a Linux box in the shell of my old TI-85. It was a pretty chunky calculator, and I've always wanted to use it as a PDA.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    6. Re:Great, I can use them by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      When you add an MMU onto a chip, it kind of alters the way it works. For all practical reasons, it's a brand new, 1st gen chip. You don't take chances with they type of systems they parent was talking about.

    7. Re:Great, I can use them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get your point, but it's possible that even the MMU is based on the 68k designs, so one might be able to place a lot of confidence on the thing working OK. On the other hand, it's possible, or even likely, that the reason they didn't add a MMU to ColdFire until now is that they couldn't make the 68k MMU work fast enough for a modern design, and that they had to develop a new MMU design. But as always, this is slashdot, and I don't really know what I'm talking about.

    8. Re:Great, I can use them by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      The systems in questions are ones that peoples live depend on. You do not use 1st gen/HW that hasn't been tested in the field on it, people can die from such errors.

      Nothing against this chip, it just isn't the correct chip to use in the target application.

  7. Nice... by AlgUSF · · Score: 1

    I wonder when MSFT Embedded Visual C++ will support this?

    --


    I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
  8. Had to be said... by c0dedude · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yeah but do they run... oh... wait... nevermind.

    --
    Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
    1. Re:Had to be said... by pla · · Score: 1

      Yeah but do they run... oh... wait... nevermind.

      You forgot "Just imagine a Beowulf cluster of these"... ;-)

      (Actually, for the price/performance ratio, I'd rather have a cluster of Athlon XP 2600's. But that would require thinking outside-the-joke).

  9. on chip stuff by baryon351 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Other key features of the new MCF547x and MCF548x ColdFire processors include on-chip FPU and eMAC

    Dammit apple, I just bought a brand new eMac only months ago, and now they're putting them on-chip for under $30!

    1. Re:on chip stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you read wrong, that should be emacs

    2. Re:on chip stuff by MikeXpop · · Score: 2, Funny

      Man did you get ripped off. The other day I downloaded emacs for FREE!

      --
      Etiquette is etiquette. He kills his mother but he can't wear grey trousers.
  10. ColdFire is *already* supported in Linux by gergoid · · Score: 5, Informative

    I added support for ColdFire processors to Linux years ago. This won't be new. It was added to Linus kernels in the 2.5 series, and is fully supported in the 2.6 kernels for all the older ColdFire parts (5206, 5249, 5272, 5282, 5307, 5407). Ofcourse the older parts did not have an MMU.

    Look under the arch/m68knommu branch for all the architecture support...

    1. Re:ColdFire is *already* supported in Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look under the arch/m68knommu branch for all the architecture support...

      That was put there for 68ks such as the 68EC060 which had no MMU, not coldfire

      Coldfire is another chip entirely.

    2. Re:ColdFire is *already* supported in Linux by gergoid · · Score: 4, Informative

      Wrong. The ColdFire's run the same ISA as the m68k family. They are just a reimplemtation of the their ISA. Go look at the code under arch/m68knommu in the 2.6 linux source. You will find my name next to all the ColdFire bits.

    3. Re:ColdFire is *already* supported in Linux by pyrrhonist · · Score: 4, Funny
      That was put there for 68ks such as the 68EC060 which had no MMU, not coldfire

      Yeah! Way to serve the guy who wrote the support for the earlier ColdFire chips! Greg was obviously talking out his ass and doesn't know anything about the code he wrote. IT'S ON!

      /*
      * crt0_ram.S -- startup code for MCF5206 ColdFire Arnewsh board.
      *
      * (C) Copyright 1999-2002, Greg Ungerer (gerg@snapgear.com).
      *
      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    4. Re:ColdFire is *already* supported in Linux by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Tue enough, but I thought the "nommu" part meant that it was effectively running uCLinux and not the full Linux?

  11. Yay! by ejaw5 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Finally! A day will come where I can get a processor with MM and NX bit on a mobile motherboard featuring MXM interface.

    --

    $cat /dev/random > Sig
    1. Re:Yay! by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Finally! A day will come where I can get a processor with MM and NX bit on a mobile motherboard featuring MXM interface. "

      Rats, my universal translator is broken.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  12. FYI Freescale is the old Motorola SPS group by cacheMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This isn't some fly-by-night chip maker.

    1. Re:FYI Freescale is the old Motorola SPS group by Roland+Piquepaille · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Thanks Mr. Obvious

    2. Re:FYI Freescale is the old Motorola SPS group by cacheMan · · Score: 0

      You are welcome, Mr. Jacka$$.

    3. Re:FYI Freescale is the old Motorola SPS group by bn557 · · Score: 1

      Dude, it's Mr. Piquepaille. Don't you even TRY to read the parent poster's name?

      P

      --
      Humans are slow, innaccurate, and brilliant; computers are fast, acurrate, and dumb; together they are unbeatable
  13. Wow by iminplaya · · Score: 1, Funny

    Cold fusion processors... Is it real or is...oh, nevermind...

    --
    What?
  14. ColdFire is 680x0 w/ recoded ISA by r00t · · Score: 1, Informative

    Just as Power begat PowerPC and x86 begat x86-64,
    so 680x0 begat ColdFire.

    In this case, the instruction set was recoded
    to save memory and reduce power consumption.
    Given some 680x0 assembly code, you pretty much
    have ColdFire assembly code. The mapping from
    opcode to binary is different. Most likely there
    are a few minor changes beyond that, but not much.

  15. Re:This isn't a great as it seems by Three+Headed+Man · · Score: 1, Interesting

    He's right. I'm a developer, and there's nothing that we can say that this chip really offers. As it is, I'm going to wait some time before working with it. It's not uncommon to discover flaws and exploits in a chip architecture in the first few months after it's released. It holds promise, but I'm going to wait and stick with something else for the time being.

    --
    I'm probably at the karma cap. Mod up a funny troll instead, it lightens the mood :)
  16. PowerPC is as cheap as ColdFire by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First, let's compare apples to apples. These new ColdFire processors run at 266 MHz and cost $20-27. The 266MHz PowerPC MPC5200 (also from Motorola) costs $27.

    Even the desktop-class PPC 750s and 74xxs aren't expensive if you buy them in volume. The AmigaOne is expensive because it is a niche-of-a-niche product, not because Moto is ripping people off.

  17. Atari Coldfire Project by ceallaigh · · Score: 1

    There is actually an Atari Cold Fire Project based on these processors: http://acp.atari.org/

  18. Huge Difference by bsd4me · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There is a really big difference between embedded processors and mainstream CPUs.

    The biggest is that power consumption is really important in the embedded world. Sometimes you can only get so much current to a board, or you can't run fans.

    Typically, embedded processors can run without support chips. Many have built in memory controllers and I/O.

    Another thing is the MMU. A lot of embedded processors have MMUs (I think most of the PPC ones do), but OS support for them is a bit lacking (or it was until recently). But at times, the MMU can get in the way

    IMHO, I would never run linux in an embedded product, other than simple internet appliances or where realtime isn't required. Commerical RTOSs like VxWorks really are worth it for most embedded applications.

    --

    (S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))

    1. Re:Huge Difference by bhima · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have *never* found a project where VxWorks was worth the cost! In fact if you look they are loosing market share to Linux. Also the two most commonly used systems are either in-house home rolled things like I use or Linux. Of I'm not writing code for space missions, just medical devices.

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    2. Re:Huge Difference by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      Of I'm not writing code for space missions, just medical devices.

      Yup. And you don't want to be naked in the wind in a product liability suit. Say what you will about commercial software, every one of them washes their hands of product liability.

      Much better to go with something that can be repeatably tested and eternally supported. A stack of real-live tests trumps any gaurantee from the manufacturer.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    3. Re:Huge Difference by bhima · · Score: 1
      Exactly!

      In some cases it makes sense to go with an externally maintained OS and in some cases it does not. But liability isn't really a deciding factor because *no* OS vendor is going to provide liability indemnity of any sort.

      Really the factors that have the most weight are: Bootstrapping time, support and unit cost. The testing doesn't usually get factored in.

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    4. Re:Huge Difference by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      IMHO, I would never run linux in an embedded product, other than simple internet appliances or where realtime isn't required. Commerical RTOSs like VxWorks [windriver.com] really are worth it for most embedded applications.

      ACK you are missing a HUGE part of the usefulness of embedded linux.

      Yes RT stuff and other things that are running the hardware near it's limits and life is at risk when the device is running? rtOS is important.

      for a Network enabled device that needs lots of functionality... for example a home automation main processing panel. Linux is the way to go. I can easily get the DHCP lease, offer up a SMB share to the ramdisk so the home user can easily drop his new config file and pick up the current log file and allow the user to simply drop the firmware.bin file there to easily update the whole thing.

      add to that httpd running (or something smaller) and now the home user can see status from a web browser or do some controls....

      now we can add into the fact that we can multitask. I can have an app running that is reading the rs485 data collection panels, one that talks to the house's alarm panel and another controlling and talking to the LCD control panels in the house while finally a parser looking through the user's flat file psudeo code that is being translated into commands to perform daily.

      under linux I am able to make that device within 1 week. in a commercial RTOS it takes much MUCH longer, much more money and there are some real hurdles that need to be scaled as some of the software will need to be ported that is readily available to run under linux (example... gpsd so the gps in the attic set's the HA systems clock from the GPS network and the HA panel act's as the whole houses time server.)

      Granted I am doing things that are beyond what embedded traditionally does...

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  19. ColdFire is 680x0, nearly by r00t · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ColdFire was created like this:

    1. start with 680x0
    2. rip out the bloat (MMU, fancy FPU, etc.)
    3. redo the opcode-to-binary mapping

    Often you can use 680x0 assembly code on
    a ColdFire chip, though you'll need to run
    it through a ColdFire assembler. You can't
    just grab a binary.

  20. Re:This isn't a great as it seems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't click that link. If you check your status bar, it's "http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://www.peopl esprimary.com/?n=Sarojin", which redirects to http://www.peoplesprimary.com/?n=Sarojin, not a Google search. The page is nasty

  21. VxWorks is crummy by r00t · · Score: 3, Informative

    Their shell is an abomination. Their filesystem
    is plain old DOS FAT, optionally with an
    incompatible long-filename feature. The "mount"
    command (function? all the same...) is totally
    defective, doing some kind of dumb text substitution
    instead of real mount points. Memory support is
    terribly limited -- is 32 MB enough for you?

    For the cost of VxWorks, you can get a bit of
    extra memory for running Linux. You'll also save
    on development costs that way.

    If you'd really prefer a tiny OS designed for
    strict real-time from the start, use eCos.
    It's free even.

    1. Re:VxWorks is crummy by bsd4me · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have never needed a filesystem on an embedded product, and I don't think I have worked on a deployed system with more that 32 M. I think the biggest had 8M.

      I would also be hesitant to deploy an RTOS without a proven track record and without good support. I have found kernel bugs before, and I have had to fly out tech support to help out with problems at customer sites. Most commercial vendors will also support old versions for a long time if needed.

      --

      (S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))

    2. Re:VxWorks is crummy by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would also be hesitant to deploy an RTOS without a proven track record and without good support. I have found kernel bugs before, and I have had to fly out tech support to help out with problems at customer sites. Most commercial vendors will also support old versions for a long time if needed.

      Well, ignoring that your login tells it all, I find it funny that you would knock Linux for support. You know that Linux (and to a large degree all OSS including BSD) has won the major awards for support for about the last 5 years. The OSS world tends to offer the best all around support.

      In addition, the Linux/OSS world gives you the source code, so that you can figure out what is wrong and even do patches yourself. I figure that if you are really doing embedded, then you certainly have a clue about the kernel and how it operates.

      As to flying otu tech support, well, all major companies do that, for a fee. So do you. I am quite sure that your company makes a profit IN SPITE (or perhaps, because) of having to deal with uncaught bugs.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:VxWorks is crummy by bsd4me · · Score: 1

      Well, ignoring that your login tells it all, I find it funny that you would knock Linux for support.

      I am not knocking Linux or BSD support. I am just saying that I have had situations where support from commercial vendors is really worth it, especially when you need the same level of support for old versions where upgrading is not an option.

      In addition, the Linux/OSS world gives you the source code...

      Yes, the Linux and BSD kernel and userland source is available for free. That is a huge bonus. However, most RTOS vendors will make their code avaialble for a fee (last time I looked into this, it was pretty big, though.

      Linux and BSD are both fantastic systems, but IMHO, I do not think they belong in mission critical realtime applications. There are some companies like LynuxWorks that support embedded Linux, but given the choice I would almost always choose LynxOS over Embedded Linux, but most of the embedded systems I have work on require hard-realtime and I tend to choose very conservatively on embedded projects.

      --

      (S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))

    4. Re:VxWorks is crummy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You know that Linux (and to a large degree all OSS including BSD) has won the major awards for support for about the last 5 years.

      Huh? What does that mean? Whose awards? And who won it - Linux itself??? I've never heard of anything like that.

      Google for "linux support awards" virtually draws a blank - only Novell who say they've got 'award winning support' but not specifically their Linux support.

    5. Re:VxWorks is crummy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      but most of the embedded systems I have work on require hard-realtime and I tend to choose very conservatively on embedded projects.

      To mention another, RTEMS is a open-source real-time OS with a decent pedigree and commercial support available. (The page is a shameless rip-off of GCC's.)

      There's also Red Hat's eCos but I don't think they support it anymore.

  22. Re:This isn't a great as it seems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry about that, I didn't check the link. -THM

  23. Another chip *family*? No. by DdJ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Another chip family? No, unless you think Intel XScale and TI OMAP are in different chip families. The ColdFire chips are just another example of the m68k family, like the DragonBall chips are.

  24. cheapest embedded linux board? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What's the cheapest embedded linux board (inluding cost of flash ram .. oh yeah must have ethernet)?

    Anyone have ideas?

    I am checking on google .. seems like the minimum amount to spend would be over 200.

    1. Re:cheapest embedded linux board? by AtomicBomb · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I am thinking about buying something similar (for ARM based, decent amount of flash, with ethernet). The best deal I can get is about $250 + complusive DHL option (another $40-50 to Australia/New Zeland). At the same time, I know I can get it for half the price if I can secure an order of 25+... Cannot find enough like minded geeks from my class to make a bulk order.

      I feel that we can take advantage of some consumer electronics product... A lot of them are slightly modification of the reference design... Don't know where to start though... Any suggestion is welcome.

    2. Re:cheapest embedded linux board? by jadel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How small does your embedded device have to be?
      You can get mini-itx systems including a via processor and motherboard for approximately A$210 (with the current exchange rate about US$150) with negligable shipping.
      They are not true embedded boards, and Via doesn't seem to have a handy total power draw figure on their website, but for many situations they might work just as well.

    3. Re:cheapest embedded linux board? by satterth · · Score: 1
      After you hack it up, will a Linksys Wrt54g do the trick for you?

      Linksys Wrt54g

      --
      Being called a dork on Slashdot must be like being called the retard in special ed.
  25. This underscores the need for software freedom. by jbn-o · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Innovation like this underscores the need for relying on free software (or, put differently, the problem with relying or recommending non-free software). It's an easy trap to get into when you use an i386 GNU/Linux distribution (as most GNU/Linux users do, I suspect) because there are so many opportunities to get hardware that only fully work with non-free software (like nVidia video cards that require non-free kernel driver software to operate fully). When you become dependent on non-free software you lose portability which prevents easily moving to interesting hardware like this one. Non-free video and audio codecs are similar; if you base your work on some Microsoft library for decoding audio or video you won't easily be able to read those files on a non-i386 platform.

    Software proprietors won't supply the wide range of support the free software community does. Software proprietors won't give you the power to provide your own support or buy it from programmers and sysadmins in the free marketplace.

    1. Re:This underscores the need for software freedom. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Stallman, is that you?

  26. Re:Screw Amigas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Revive the excellent Atari ST! Blew Amiga's away big time.

  27. uClinux by gagy · · Score: 1

    mmmm.. that kind of sounds like an STD of some kind. A mix of crabs and clymedia. Can't wait to catch that one.

    --
    -I DDoSed your mom.
  28. big embedded systems by r00t · · Score: 1

    Consider the disk array controllers EMC makes.
    Last I heard, a year or two ago, they were
    using about 32 GB of RAM.

    Consider the airborne radar systems and cell
    phone base station software-defined radio based
    on Mercury Computer Systems hardware. It's common
    to have dozens of gigabytes of memory, sometimes
    even hundreds of gigabytes. Each node of the
    multi-CPU system might have 2 gigabytes or so.
    Linux is often used.

    Consider the telephone switchs NexTel produces.
    That's a few gigabytes, running Linux of course.

    1. Re:big embedded systems by bsd4me · · Score: 1

      I can't comment on the drive controllers, since I don't know much about that area, but I know some about the other two.

      As for the radar and comm hardware, I suspect that these started out on workstation hardware, and Linux made the transition to actual hardware much easier. I used to do a ton of comm simulation work, and would have loved this luxary. This would be a good fit for Linux in the embedded world, but it wouldn't surprise me if a traditional RTOS was used for the control functions.

      Regarding the switch software, do you know if Linux is used at all levels of the SS7 stack, or just on the processing at the higher levels?

      --

      (S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))

    2. Re: big embedded systems by r00t · · Score: 1
      For the switch hardware, PowerPC Linux is used to emulate some proprietary hardware that is no longer manufactured. Within the emulator, there is another OS. I'm told you don't just rewrite this sort of software. I gather it's a pile of decades-old spaghetti-code in a screwball language, and it has to speak oddball protocols for Iran, etc.

      I'm more familiar with the radar and software-defined radio and such. Mercury, CSPI, and Sky are producing this. They put 300 PowerPC processors in a 9U space, or 80 processors and lots of FPGAs in a 6U space. Sometimes VxWorks or MC/OS gets used, but often the choice is Linux. The US Navy in particular wants to use Linux for everything.

      For the cellphone base station, you want to process the radio signal directly. You do an A-to-D for each antenna, grabbing the whole frequency band for all phones at once. (yow!) Then, totally in software, you pick this apart to get the signals. You do echo cancelation. You might do beam-forming. You demodulate the signals, feeding error correction info back into the front-end code. The end result is a set of nice clean digital data streams for the phone switch to process.

      For radar, it's pretty much the same thing, except that the end result is cockpit video of the terrain or a set of targets.

      Here's another example: video transcoding and lossless logo insertion. Suppose you have some PAL video (50 fields/second, 576x1024) and you want North American HDTV video (59.94 fields/second, 1920x1080). Good transcoding involves motion detection, so that you can properly re-create a soccer player running instead of having a blur or double-image problem. Oh, you'd like to do this live, with cool 3-D cuts for ad insertion. The ads are in some other video format, and the odd-even nature of the interlaced fields wouldn't line up even if the ads were in the same format.

  29. Re:Screw Amigas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are all the Tramails dead yet? No? Then it is not yet time.

  30. VxWorks is worthless because it lacks one thing... by smcdow · · Score: 2, Informative
    ... Perl.

    We looked at VxWorks for our first-ever embedded project. When we found out there was no Perl for VxWorks, nor any chance of ever, ever having Perl on VxWorks, we quickly abandonded VxWorks in favor of Linux.

    We've have no problems whatsoever using Linux as an embedded OS. Plus, we get to write much of our code in Perl as well. This is as it should be.

    --
    In the course of every project, it will become necessary to shoot the scientists and begin production.
  31. uClinux by Tesla+Tank · · Score: 1

    Anyone else find uClinux to be a funny word?

  32. Linux supports Cold Fire.. by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 2, Funny

    Rush fans everywhere rejoice!

  33. Coldfire is a popular controller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Motorola has sold a lot of coldfire controllers. They usually offer a dozen or so independently addressable relays, rs232, firewire, usb1.0/2.0 support, sensor and tie points (and usually a gob of other stuff) all stuck onto a small 10.16x12.7cm (4x5 inch) printed circuit board. Great boards for feedback/monitoring/control/SCADA. They usually are fairly cheap too.

  34. Re:This isn't a great as it seems by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
    The news is that it's a common chip that now has the Memory management onboard! It's an tried and true architecture, but now it will be easier for "hobbiests" to use linux because you can use the built in memory functions in the kernel...rather than having to adapt every single program to manage it's own memory...

    It's now able to "qualify" for something like the Gumstix project [for intel Xscale]...a quick and dirty hobby board that's easy to port common stuff [telnet, serial I/O, and run some programs] to and use in some kind of hobby project. Not that it couldn't before, but now it can use off-the-shelf programs simply recompiled rather than hacked up to cover for missing hardware functions that we mere mortals can't do easily!!!

  35. more big embedded systems by r00t · · Score: 1
    How about medical? Linux is used for various kinds of body scanners. Often, especially with the 3-D stuff, many gigabytes of memory are required. Examples:

    helical-scan CAT (a 3-D X-ray)

    ultrasound with live 3-D video

    digital X-ray, again with live video

    PET scan (radioactive sugar emits positrons)

    virtual bowel exam, with the doctor having a game-like 3-D view of your butt -- except that he doesn't get a BFG9000 to hit the cancers (the data comes from one of the above of course, the digital X-ray I think)

  36. Damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    That $30 chip is almost twice as fast as my combination (web/ftp/print/useless crap)server. If it has above 32M of memory, it has more RAM also.

    I've got to admit that the thing is finally going to die at some point.

  37. What's so "u" about uCLinux? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 3, Interesting

    uCLinux is a port of Linux to CPUs without an MMU. Without an MMU, the chips don't support the convincingly simulated parallelism of fork(), rather just the nominally similar (blocking) vfork(). What other compromises must an application concede when running under uCLinux, rather than a "full" Linux kernel?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:What's so "u" about uCLinux? by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      Considering most embedded apps are one-trick ponies, not a whole lot. Vending machines, security cameras, most robotics projects, they are even driven tasks. You are running an app that quietly waits for an interrupt event (a keystroke, a signal on one of it's inputs to change) and then respond as quickly as possible.

      I wouldn't run any kind of graphical application. Assuming you could outfit the things with a video card. They would also make crummy real-time processing units. (Real-time OS's ration processor time so that you can gaurentee the sensors are checked exactly at x interval.)

      In short, they can't walk and chew gum at the same time.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    2. Re:What's so "u" about uCLinux? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Aren't embedded CPUs mostly required to respond in realtime? Doesn't that mean uCLinux can't serve their primary market?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:What's so "u" about uCLinux? by pclminion · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Memory protection and the ability to multiprocess are two different concepts. All you need is a timer interrupt to implement concurrency. Without an MMU, the processes could corrupt each other, but there's no reason you can't multiprocess without an MMU.

      Consider the TSRs from the days of DOS. You could easily latch onto the timer interrupt and have some background task run 18.2 times per second. Your only restriction was that you couldn't call DOS if the "in-DOS" flag was set, because DOS wasn't reentrant.

      One can easily imagine a truly reentrant operating system supporting concurrent processes but which lacks any memory protection.

    4. Re:What's so "u" about uCLinux? by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      Depends on what you mean by "Realtime".

      "Realtime" to a human operator is half a second. That's eternity to even the slowest modern processor. The fastest someone can double click a button is about 0.17 seconds.

      "Realtime" to an HVAC system is 5 minutes. (Furnaces and AC units can't safely handle changes in smaller increments.)

      "Realtime" to a weather station is 15 minutes. (Weather doesn't change much faster than that.)

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    5. Re:What's so "u" about uCLinux? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      "Realtime" in embedded systems means at least deterministic execution time for any CPU task - not just arbitrarily fast. Simulated task switching, without even switchable HW context banks, don't cut it. That's why, for example, Java (a software VM simulating a CPU) isn't certified for aircraft navigation systems, and features unnervingly prominent warnings to that effect.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    6. Re:What's so "u" about uCLinux? by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      Very true.

      But if you have the budget to be building something that requires precise timing, you have the budget to use a processor with a real-live MMU.

      uCLinux is designed for the hobbiest for whom the concept of "realtime" is a little more fluid, or for low-cost appliances where price trumps performance.

      As far as aircraft navigation systems go, it's right up there with Nuclear reactor control on the "Don't Go There" list for just about every consumer device manufactured. The Windows operating system has warnings about it in the EULA.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    7. Re:What's so "u" about uCLinux? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The MMU is also a power and size liability. Spending money on engineering a resource-light product can be worth it, especially when confronting the rising ubiquity of mobile client devices, in a PAN.

      Right now I'm tracking a uCLinux port to the MicroBlaze "soft processor", which runs on the Xilinx FPGAs. There's no MMU because gates are precious in the reconfigurable HW. They're having timing problems, where the simulated clock drifts, often wildly and hugely, in a feedback with certain performance scenarios. But they can factor out high-profile kernel and app source code into hardware, like the TCP/IP stack. That gets back performance and determinance. And retains flexibility in the field, for adaptive runtime porting features to HW in the remaining gates. I'm interested in learning more about the limits of uCLinux (vs. the standard kernel) for designing apps to port to that platform.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  38. ColdFire are not MC68Ks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    They try to fool you into thinking they are. But they aren't. They are an entirely different architecture that uses similar nmeumonics and addressing modes.

    Even the hexidecimal encodings of those instructions (i.e. the machine language) is dissimilar from 68K machine language.

    ColdFire is a strange product, I moto has been pushing it for some time now. I'm not sure why it is still around.

    1. Re:ColdFire are not MC68Ks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have a source for that? Everything I have ever read about the relationship of ColdFire and 68k indicates that the ColdFire is basically a modified 68k design, with most of the CISC complexities removed. A little googling found me this 1997 usenet post
      which claims in some detail that the coldfire 51xx series is a modified 68040 and the 52xx series is a modified 68060.

  39. turbo by jizmonkey · · Score: 1

    Wasn't that to make old software and hardware work that couldn't run right on the new machines?

    --
    With great power comes great fan noise.
  40. Re:VxWorks is worthless because it lacks one thing by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
    (Disclosure, TCL Zealot)

    Perl for an embedded application!? I have a favorite scripting language too, but small and fast is king. I feel like a C compiler is a guilty convienience.

    Then again, I'm used to the days when "embedded" meant 64K of ram on a 4 Mhz processor.

    --
    "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
    --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  41. All it needs to do by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 2

    is send out signals to activate alarm clocks, lights, bells, sirens, speakers, and display a message on a computer with details of the 911 emergancy.

    We are talking about something that an original Palm Pilot or security alarm system can do. An 8 bit processor may be too underpowered, but I believe this is more of a 16/32 bit hybrid like a 68K processor. If you examine ADT, and other boxes that security alarm systems use, you won't find the most powerful processors in those. Maybe a 16 or 32 bit processor with low end speed.

    Now building a 911 CAD box with a Pentium 4 is overkill, and unless you really need the horsepower, it would be overpriced.

    You have missed the point, I wanted to make a low cost, no frills, version of a 911 CAD box. Other companies have this box but charge $1000USD to $4000USD or more for each box, and some emergency providers cannot afford that.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    1. Re:All it needs to do by phurley · · Score: 1

      Check out Applied Digital they make a line of controllers (8-bit based) that will probabably handle your needs and ben be found for low cost.

      --
      Home Automation & Linux -- now I know I'm a geek
  42. Low end X86 Linux 911 CAD box by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That was my original idea to use a low end X86 processor. Embedded Linux already exists for it, and if SCO gets their way we can always change to BSD Unix.

    Anyway an original socket 7 X86 chip should work fine for low end 911 Computer Automated Dispatch. That is if they still sell them. ;)

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    1. Re:Low end X86 Linux 911 CAD box by bhima · · Score: 1
      I don't think SCO's case has much merit! I know I shouldn't say this here, I'm a big fan of *BSD. I just finished a project using NetBSD & AMD Elan that worked out very well. I also like Busybox!

      Mini-ITX and Nano-ITX products might also be a good choice. (coupled with CF cards)

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
  43. Metrowerks *is* a subsidiary of Freescale by wingbat · · Score: 1

    No secret here -- Motorola SPS bought Metrowerks and kept it as a wholly owned subsidiary, Motorola SPS is now Freescale (a wholly owned subsidiary of Motorola).

  44. That's still overkill by BattyMan · · Score: 1

    The only x86 chip you would want to think about in an alarm box would be imbedded _3_86 flavors.

    That said, they'll still consume _way_ too much power. Yer alarm system has to run on batteries during power outages, or when intruders are smart enough to shut off the power before entering.

    You _definately_ want to look at 8-bit CMOS microcontrollers, or something else in that range. I'm rather fond of 80C31/51 types myself. No, these won't run Linux, but plenty of F/OSS tools are available. Do you want to do image and sound recognition, or do you just want to watch switches and sensors?

    --
    Exceeding the recommended torque is not recommended.
  45. I want a box that is expandable by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

    and can be programmed for things like voice over IP, image displays, real streaming audio, and perhaps have a small build in web server that can be used to configure or interface with another system. Security is a must, everything must be encrypted and password protected. I thought about using GPG for encryption for data packets the dispatch system sends to each 911 CAD box. We don't wany any false alarms or crackers tampering with the boxes.

    Windows and DOS simply won't do, not stable enough for a 24/7 realtime environment. Also very insecure. Linux or Embedded Linux seems to be ideal.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  46. Thanks for the Micro and Nano ITX suggestions by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

    it might help to lower the cost if we use standard off the shelf parts instead of fabercating our own.

    Just need a double-throw relay interface for the box to access the various devices it will set off. Like in a firehouse it needs to flicker the lights in the shower, etc. Everyone in the firehouse should know that there is a real emergancy going on, so a device is needed for every room. Figure about 12 to 15 double-throw relay interfaces. It will be a matrix that can be controlled, and one or more of those relays might send data to a printer or image device with more info on the emergency. I'd like to use Wifi, but it is too insecure to manage, plus someone could block it easily. Maybe a CAT5/CAT6 network as well? I figure throw in SAMBA on an Ethernet and print out the emercency details to a networked printer or file server somewhere.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  47. Re:This isn't a great as it seems by Christopher+B.+Brown · · Score: 1
    Well, this means that you've got something that amounts to a [rough] equivalent to yesteryear's M68030, which was nicely up to running Real UNIX(tm) (none of this 'ucLinux' stuff), but which is, price-wise and other-glue-wise, equivalent to the previous ColdFire series.

    It may not add massive functionality, but if it allows building more reliable systems, due to use of MMU, that seems hardly a bad thing.

    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.