Re: modem not responding

[Tushar <tushar@xxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 15:30, Jean Lee wrote:
Hi all,
	I am also agree with this. While I know there is much more in 2.6, I
have to maintains something developed on 2.4 and may be enhance it
also.  Actual problem is there are two types of developers on this list
.Kernel developer who do not need to answer any one and application
developers who have to answer their customers. And customer hardly care
about os versions (I doubt if they care about OS type at all,
particularly in  embedded systems where compatibility with other package
is not a issue). So unless a stable version of 2.6 is not available, (I
mean one that works on board with support for required devices, not just
one which has no error), there will be use of 2.4  by application
programmer.
		
		And other thing is how much linux community is serious about making
things that works in real life. If I, as some authority who have to
decide on OS for embedded device come to know that older os are not
supported that there will be one negative mark for linux.  We need to
also see from that point of view.

			So the I think we should support 2.4 kernel for at least some minor
fixing with an advice to move to 2.6, and try to get more developer on
2.6 kernel for device support. I know kernel developer will not agree
with me, but we want to see smooth transition from 2.4 to 2.6. 
		 (You don't throw away older people from your home to make room for
younger one, even if you know they will have to go one day.)

Note:
	I am a C++ developer and I have worked on Windows,Linux for Desktop
and  embedded Linux on ARM.I like linux and will like to contribute to
some project involving  porting form 2.4 to 2.6. Suggestions are
welcomed.  

Regards,
Tushar

> Hello all,
> 
> Just to give my experience as an example :
> 
> For a new project, I am currently searching an SOC with integrated USB 
> host, 2 UARTs, GPIOs, RTC and the support for Linux.
> I am new to linux and I am primarily an hardware developper. I think 
> that I can develop some applications using existing device drivers but I 
> think that I am too new to help to develop some new device drivers. What 
> I need first is something which is working.
> 
> After a short study, it seems that the SOCs which are well suited for my 
> application are the AT91RM9200 and Cirrus EDB9302. For both chips, the 
> only available kernel with peripherals support is a 2.4 kernel. (and 2.6 
> kernels are unofficial ones)
> The conclusion is simple : I think that I will start developing a new 
> product with 2.4 kernel BECAUSE of device drivers availibility and 
> BECAUSE I'm too new to linux and I can't spend some time to learn how to 
> write an USB host device driver for a 2.6 kernel.
> It is not that I don't want but if I say to my customer that I need 3 
> month to port linux to his application : he will laugh.....
> When I will succeed with 2.4 kernel, I will then learn how to write a 
> device driver and start to help beginners.
> 
> I don't think that I am an exception. A lot of project are now going 
> through linux because it is opensource and for a lot of people, it is 
> the same as free. Moreover, I think that a lot of developpers can write 
> an application software but not a device driver.
> 
> Conclusion :
> I think that the real problem is that the kernel is in transition : 
> There are real linux developpers who are working on 2.6 kernels and who 
> don't want to hear about 2.4 kernels because it is one year old for 
> them. But I think that there are a lot of people like me for whom the 
> current linux version is 2.4 BECAUSE of device drivers availability (and 
> 2.6 is an experimental version)...
> There are two sorts of developpers who needs two different sort of help 
> in one list :
> 
> A solution is perhaps :
> If someone doesn't want to deal with 2.4 kernels, he can simply not 
> reply (or just advice to go to 2.6 kernel and stop the support if the 
> answer is "impossible to move to 2.6 kernel")... I can't expect from 
> someone who is working on 2.6 kernel to provide support for a 2.4 kernel 
> and I think that there are enough people who are working on 2.4 kernel 
> based applications who can provide support to my problem.
> Once most basic device drivers ( if we can consider USB host as a basic 
> device driver) will be available for 2.6 kernels, the need for these two 
> sort of support will disappear (but will certainly appear between 2.6 
> and 2.8 kernels...). I'm sure that Darwin would have agreed.
> 
> Personnal note :
> If anybody knows another SOC with integrated USB host, 2 UARTs, GPIOs, 
> RTC and the support for Linux 2.6, can you give me its name?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Jean Lee
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Subscription options: http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm
> FAQ/Etiquette:       http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/armlinux/mailinglists.php
> 



-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscription options: http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm
FAQ/Etiquette:       http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/armlinux/mailinglists.php