> -----Original Message----- > From: tclug-list-bounces at mn-linux.org > [mailto:tclug-list-bounces at mn-linux.org]On Behalf Of Florin Iucha > > On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 06:03:05PM -0600, Chuck Cole wrote: > > I think this a seriously wrong solution. Anyone concerned with the real > > world and embedded machines, etc, finds the 32-bit architecture > adequate for > > data representation, qualtitatively more reliable (fewer things to go > > wrong), lower cost, and much lower power. In the great > majority of storage > > and processing words, the integers and double precision math > leave 32 bits > > per memory location unused. That space is opportunity for > error and power > > consumption that does nothing for the main and critical > application of such > > systems and networks. For Linux folk to make a decision that > limits the use > > of Linux in 32-bit architectures for critical embedded > applications seems > > mighty dumb to me. Not all Linux hosts are like gaming > machines where it > > simply does not matter, and 64 bits makes a better game. To me, this > > indicates profound ignorance and/or oblivion by those programmers > > Chuck, > > It's not the 'Linux folk'. It's coreutils which is a GNU package. Better, but still a problem. Thanks for the correction. > > BTW: > > I suspect the embedded system will do fine in 2039 and beyond. Many > of them are 8 or 16 bits, and still manage to do the required time > calculations. Yes, but... :-) Some embedded systems are indeed the 8 and 16 bit micros, but very many of the "more serious" systems have VME (and similar) computer systems of several boards extent, and these have a networked runtime environment at terminals much like an office network of equipment and OS, etc. Two part connectors are required for connection reliability in higher shock and vibration environments or most any gear that's potentially used in a battle zone. Otherwise, the drive for "COTS" (commercial off-the shelf) is very high, and the need to use Linux is strong. Aircraft systems, helicopted systems, ship systems, and much more are all equipped with ths sort of computers and networking that is at risk by such stuff. More critical redundant systems usually have customized operating systems that are thoroughly checked and proofed, so such "features" seldom go into released gear. Chuck