[fpc-devel] "embedded" again

[Thomas Schatzl]

Hi,

On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 12:55 +0100, Michael Schnell wrote:
> On 01/16/2013 12:03 PM, Thomas Schatzl wrote:
> > Neither one of your targets fit my description of "embedded" or having 
> > "restricted" cpu or memory resources
>

... for applications like fpc (or lazarus). *Your* application may have
different requirements.

For fpc/lazarus, you need a fast enough cpu (check), sufficient memory
(check), sufficient storage (check, in the worst case either network
storage over LAN, or simply an USB HDD if onboard flash is not
sufficient) and sufficiently good I/O for use (check, Ethernet) and
suitable OS (check, Linux).

What again, differentiates a beagleboard or a qnap from your PC if you
put them into the same case (or hide them from a user)? I'd guess that
except for the performance difference, users would not notice for these
particular applications.

The performance aspect is getting better and better day by day as you
already mention.

> Ooops. A NAS is a device doing 24/7 unmanaged work and features no 
> sockets for Monitor, keyboard and mouse. Both Raspbery Pi and BeagleBone 
> are PCBs that don't feature sockets for a harddisk (sata and friends) 

There are quite a few (high-end consumer) cpus that have native sata
already. Allwinner A10, Exynos5xxx, there are some i.Mx5 with sata and
all but the lowest end i.Mx6 cpus to list a few. Not sure if OMAP5 has
one. I heard of some ARM11 chips also having sata. Some of those cpus
are old.

USB2 is sufficient for what fpc/lazarus requires too.

Given what functionality NASes provide today there is not much that
differentiate them from a PC. Except maybe the different case.

> and are supposed to be installed in small housings to do 24/7 unmanage 
> work.

Neither lazarus nor fpc need a monitor, keyboard or mouse, sockets for
hdd, a small housing present *on the actual device*. You can also run
lazarus 24/7 unmanaged barring any application errors; since fpc is a
batch processing tool it does not make a lot sense to say it ever needs
to run 24/7 unmanaged.

> IMHO thus all three fulfill the criteria for "embedded" electronics.

I am more referring to devices that cannot run on or you don't want to
run a no-guarantee-anything multi-purpose OS as such that is designed
and used for any purposes. I.e. things much smaller than what you
target, and with severe restrictions on the application that is running.

Yes, it's sketchy and ymmv. Imo these are simply miniaturized
full-fledged pcs.

> 
> Of course you are right that nowadays this kind of embedded ARM Linux 
> devices resources (happily !) are not seriously restricted any more.

That's the point.

Thomas