Re: [gentoo-dev] bzipped manpages

[Daniel Campbell]

On 01/13/2017 08:06 AM, james wrote:
> On 01/13/2017 02:45 AM, Sven Eden wrote:
>
>> Btw.: Even "embedded experts" wholeheartedly agree that they disagree
>> what
>> "embedded" actually is. But I do think SoCs actually *do* qualify, at
>> least to
>> some degree...
>
>
> Huh?
>
> Probably who you deem as an expert; they have not clearly defined
> systems types and semantics of an embedded systems. An embedded system
> is one that is 'closed' to pedestrian/consumer/user modifications,
> excepting rooting and other non-normal bypass mechanisms. A modification
> is not the same thing as a configuration. An embedded system is designed
> with limited functionality or "canned product functionality" for
> consumers of very specific task-sets.  Early Micros where often more
> accurately referred to as 'microcontrollers' as their function was
> simply to replace mechanical control systems that were prone to wear and
> failure. When programming occurs (again rooting and hacking do not
> count), it is only allowed by the system designer(s). So a Rasp. Pi on
> the internet, open to dozens or thousands of coders, is not an embedded
> system. At some point it may become an embedded system, but it must be
> locked down, limited in functionality and purged of all that software
> used for development but not needed to run and function as the
> designer(s) intend. Updates are usually in a binary form, again under
> the strict control as designed by the product (embedded systems) developer.
>
>
> Given that, the reason why so many folks are confused as to what an
> embedded system actually is, is that there are lots of "open" platforms
> where users are encouraged to be the designer, thus having architecture,
> coding, and modification access that an ordinary user would not have;
> again, security hacks that grant non-normal access
> do not count. That is if you 'hack' into the product or the bios of a
> computer, you have not converted the device's intended usage into a
> embedded system, although you may have low level access to the hardware,
> firmware and other subsystems that the designers did not intentionally
> make available to you. When a computer is 'locked down and limited' like
> a kiosk, it actually is an embedded system.
>
>
> Traditionally, the easy way to set up product developers was through
> vendors (OEM like Freescale, Samsung, Broadcom, etc) via a  'dev board'.
> Example codes, minimal stack of an rtos or vendor supplied software
> system, along with documentation and details of the in-situ hardware
> that comprise the 'dev board'. Small systems did not have (nor do they
> now) have an 'OS' instead they were simple state-machines or run a
> polling algorithm. Most embedded systems still operate on these sorts of
> codes, even today.
>
>
> Fast forward, Rasp. Pi et. al are dev boards that can be turned into
> open, multi user systems, say if you make it a typical minimized linux
> system. Some even have inputs for keyboard, mouse and terminal; so that
> sort of system, would not be an embedded system. Now take the same
> board, lock it down so all it does is control the sprinklers in your
> yard, with limited functional interfaces to the 'standard user' and it
> is indeed an 'embedded system'. Most products with a small
> microprocessor are 'embedded systems'. Most Rasp. Pi boards are user
> systems because they are open and unlimited an any given time and are
> not 'locked down'.
>
>
> It takes a designer, or a team of designers to create an 'embedded
> system', particularly if the embedded system is to be turned into a
> commercial product. The net effect of boards like Rasp. Pi is open up
> the opportunity for folks to learn 'product development'. Most have
> chosen to create  user systems with some functionality not found in
> traditional desktop systems. Surely there are edge cases that blur
> the lines of distinction; but most are not a finalized product (embedded
> system) as they are in a constant state of flux related to the interned
> software, thus they are not an 'embedded system'. A properly designed
> embedded system can last in its minimized and limited form for decades
> or more and operated as intended (think digital alarm clock). Others do
> need an update to the firmware (locked down internal software), but that
> is only performed by the product owners or vendors, in the normal case
> of operation. Indeterminant hardware is just hardware; it has to be
> robustly defined, tested and implemented to be a user system, an
> embedded system, or whatever the designer has in mind.
>
>
>  So hopefully, I have articulated the fact that an 'embedded system' is
> determined by the designer, not the underlying hardware from a vendor.
> Robust embedded system design, regardless of VHDL or C or ? codes
> are more of an art-form than a technical expose on software development.
> I know embedded designers that have created thousands of products  some
> in a matter of weeks, and other teams that fail to produce a single
> robust product, in their entire lifetime.  The most prolific designer of
> them all, is simple referred to as 'doctor bitch' by her subordinates
> and friends. Some, more respectfully refer to her as the queen of
> assembler, as she has fixed thousands of compiler bugs from a myriad of
> compiler vendors, not for compensation, but because the bugs got in her
> way.......
>
>
>
> hth,
> James
>
Whoa, quite a post there! It was a good read. Is this coworker looking
for any volunteer distro work by any chance? *wink wink* :P

-- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6