Green Hills Software Decides Linux Isn't So Bad

An anonymous reader submits a link to this report on LinuxDevices.com, which begins "An outspoken open source detractor has paid Linux a back-handed compliment. Green Hills Software (GHS), known for diatribes against Linux in military/aerospace applications, is shipping 'Padded Cell technology' intended to enable the company's proprietary real-time OS to take advantage of the wealth of Linux application software." You may remember GHS's Dan O'Dowd, who's claimed that the embedded Linux Tools Market is a myth and that the open source nature of Linux makes it a threat to national security.

Comments

Padded cell eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can tell you lots about padded cells and straight jackets and basket weaving.. oh wait this is Slashdot.

Oh wait, that's right this IS Slashdot. Want me to continue?

Re:Good

[Cecil]

Lawyers generally make very fine people, at least all the ones I've ever met in a professional or non-professional sense. It's the people who hire them who are likely to be shitty people. It normally takes at least one shitty person for a matter to end up in court, so you're likely to have at least a 50% shitty person rate right off the bat.

Re:What I saw when I first clicked on this...

[Digital11]

In Korea, only the elderly decide Linux isn't so bad.

Sorry, I just had to try it out.

ugh

[twitter]

The "security risk" was the possibility of 'bad guys' inserting subtle bugs into Linux that could be exploited on the battlefield. On first glance, I'd call that unlikely but possible.

That scenerio is much more likely when code is written once by one person and never touched again. Free software is rewritten all the time. Closed source is more venerable to bug insertion by malicious employee, offshored work and especially an undetected break in to code servers. When it's closed, you don't really know if they got some guy in Moscow to write it, do you? The larger problem is bug removal, which free software excels in.

The compatability layer allows software written for embedded Linux to run on Green Hills's OS. Thus eliminating the alleged risk

I don't see the elimination of risk. Instead, I imagine they will create tons of bugs by trying to make a non free interface layer that will be difficult to write and maintain. My small experience with non free modules that have to be compiled along with kernel source has been dismal. The non free world does not have the resources to keep up with improvements and changes in the free world.