Talk:RTLinux

Advertising

This entire article reads like an advertising whitepaper from the vendor, and desperately needs to be written in a more neutral style. --Arve (talk) 22:53, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, no it doesn't. It clearly comes from a University project-background and evolved into commercial land. Often with such high-tech ware, it is only corporate vendors and OEMs supporting and selling it, before it would completely disappear. So here, Wikipedia services as a historic backbone and works well as a "red thread" for anyone interested. --𝔏92934923525 (talk) 14:45, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the warning. This is not a commercial project presently, so what would it be advertising? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Victoryodaiken (talk • contribs) 20:54, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wind River makers of Vxworks now own RTLinux

http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS2333482316.html According to this, the company that makes the proprietary real-time OS Vxworks acquired RTLinux on Feb 20 2007

Hi, old comment. Currently this is the marketing for it "Wind River Linux" see https://www.windriver.com/products/linux/  --𝔏92934923525 (talk) 14:46, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Linux OS

Linux is a kernel. GNU/Linux is an OS. Usually this would be a freetard rant, but since we're on the topic of kernels, i think the difference shouldn't be overlooked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.82.129.141 (talk) 21:45, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let's also start including the underlying electrical hardware and maybe the power companies, and the names of Linus' parents and Babbage's assistant. Or let's just not overload the article with information that isn't directly relevant? 93.161.57.224 (talk) 17:28, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have 50 textbooks on operating systems in my bookshelf and none of them use the FSF definition of OS as different from kernel. Yodaiken (talk) 13:52, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Needs an Expert

This article needs an expert to make this article more clear to a less knowledgeable person. Greatpopcorn (talk) 20:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, yes and no. Firstly, RTLinux seems discontinued or has been moved to commercial land (see Wind River and discussion above). Secondly, the over-arching "Embedded Linux" should be rather polished as RTLinux is a specific variant. Automotive Grade Linux is also in area of embedded or at least semi-embedded as it surely must fulfill various requirements for safety or real-time. I'm knowledgable insofar that I have over two decades of development in automotive area on my shoulders and Linux isn't a popular animal there. There are near rt examples such as https://www.nxp.com/design/software/embedded-software/i-mx-software/embedded-linux-for-i-mx-applications-processors:IMXLINUX or https://www.ghs.com/products/MULTI_embedded_linux.html or specifications such as AUTOSAR Adaptive https://www.autosar.org/standards/adaptive-platform/ ... or discussions see https://barrgroup.com/embedded-systems/how-to/automotive-grade-linux or AGL mentions of Kernel hardening approaches/guidelines see https://docs.automotivelinux.org/en/master/#2_Architecture_Guides/2_Security_Blueprint/4_Kernel/ and also general articles discuss rt linux requirements, e.g. https://www.embedded.com/real-time-linux/ but mainly target infotainment or similar. Henceforth I conclude, feel free to extend RTLinux, but I would invest more time in parent pages. RTLinux, as far as my professional network and experience reaches, has not taking off in industrial context, and there are many reasons or perspectives for this, and this was actually also not asked by this section, but you asked for "expert". --𝔏92934923525 (talk) 15:43, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Further inspiration, https://access.redhat.com/rhel-real-time-getting-started and https://www.suse.com/solutions/embedded/ --𝔏92934923525 (talk) 15:51, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

edit on sources section

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=RTLinux&diff=prev&oldid=1353613714

Lokiretro (talk) 09:44, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.