On Saturday 08 June 2002 12.32, Ingo Oeser wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 01:11:10AM +0200, David Olofson wrote:
> > (Software patents should be invalidated and made illegal world
> > wide, IMHO. They serve only the interests of the biggest
> > companies.)
>
> Nod, partially. Just invalidate aft
On Saturday 08 June 2002 09.28, Vincent Touquet wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 01:11:10AM +0200, David Olofson wrote:
> (cut)
>
> >>From the application POV, both approaches give the same result:
> >> Two
> >
> >"worlds" with different schedulers and services - and
> > unfortunately, different d
On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 01:11:10AM +0200, David Olofson wrote:
> (Software patents should be invalidated and made illegal world
> wide, IMHO. They serve only the interests of the biggest
> companies.)
Nod, partially. Just invalidate after 2-3 year on the market
and after 1-2 year(s) if not marke
On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 01:11:10AM +0200, David Olofson wrote:
(cut)
>>From the application POV, both approaches give the same result: Two
>"worlds" with different schedulers and services - and unfortunately,
>different drivers. That is, if you want real time I/O, you still have
>to port Linux
On Monday 03 June 2002 17.10, Vincent Touquet wrote:
> I took the freedom to announce this here :)
> I think it is a _great_ step forward for
> low latency, besides the low latency and
> interruptible kernel patches.
>
> Announcement:
> http://www.opersys.com/press/prelease-adeos-020603.html
>
> L
I took the freedom to announce this here :)
I think it is a _great_ step forward for
low latency, besides the low latency and
interruptible kernel patches.
Announcement:
http://www.opersys.com/press/prelease-adeos-020603.html
LKML thread:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=10230935972&r=1&w=2
