NO_MMU archs / relation to uClinux

[Mike Frysinger]

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:37 PM, David McCullough wrote:
> Jivin Mike Frysinger lays it down ...
>> the uClinux.org guys are just very bad at pushing anything back
>> upstream.
>
> I would beg to differ :-)  We do what we can with the small resources we
> have while making and supporting products to pay the bills.  We are not
> the uClinux.org guys though,  that would be Arcturus, we are the uClinux-dist
> guys that you talk about below, most known as SnapGear, though we have
> officially changed company names more times than most can remember :-)

damn, didnt you were trollin this list too ;).  yes, i was referring
to the uClinux-dist (i.e. you) and not Arcturus.  although i doubt
anyone outside of the small groups who have actually been to Arcturus
even knows about them.  i'd venture to guess that most everyone
associates the two as being the same.

> There are plenty of examples of large and small scale "push-back" from us
> at various times to the upstream projects (ie., kernel, openssl, openswan,
> gcc, binutils, pptp and yes, uClibc at one point).

i was making my statements based on my experience with poking through
all the packages that uclinux-dist has as i updated them in the
blackfin uclinux-dist.  lots of patches, many not terribly clean, and
not a mention in the upstream projects as to what's going on.

> As everyone knows (or should know) getting changes merged upstream can be
> time consuming and tedious, depending on the project and the maintainers
> and their particular goals.   We have limited resources and we choose our
> fights.  The uClinux-dist releases are our way or reducing the load but
> ensuring all the work we do is out there for people to find.

sorry, i didnt mean it as a slight against you, i was just stating
"this is how it is".  you guys want to make money, so that's your
prerogative.  it is certainly not my place to tell you what to do or
how to run your business.  i'm not paying you after all ;).
-mike