US Navy using Linux

The Inquirer ^ | July 17, 2002 | Egan Orion

[bvw]

Hooray! This would be good if it counters that news I heard a few years back that the Navy intended to move ALL it's shipboard systems to Windows.

However I would hope that the NAVY would also consider some other unix alternatives to linux and its quasi-monolithic kernal.

[dyed_in_the_wool]

However I would hope that the NAVY would also consider some other unix alternatives to linux and its quasi-monolithic kernal.

If the next word out of your mouth is 'Hurd' I'm going to scream...

[bvw]

No. Here's a list of some that I found w/ google though ... Unix or Unix-like Operating Systems

[alex]

I am really shocked that anybody would consider using WinNT for anything as dangerous as modern warship.

Next thing we will know is that the world ended because bug in WinNT caused nuclear attack.

[RolandBurnam]

please click ok or cancel to fire nuclear weapons.

[lelio]

Some of the reasons the Navy is moving to Linux are:
1. the source is open. Who knows what's in NT? For all the Navy knows it could be sending off their coordinates to the ChiComs.
2. if you don't like something in Linux you can change it.
3. linux (without X) is more stable than NT.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Yea, what he said.

[Mike Fieschko]

please click ok or cancel to fire nuclear weapons

'Windows has detected new hardware and is installing the drivers ... '

[JameRetief]

'A fatal error has occurred...'

[dyed_in_the_wool]

I'd think the Navy would either go with a BSD variant (FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc.), a BSD-Like Linux (Gentoo, Slack) or with a proprietary system (QNX?, Plan 9?)
I would have recommended SCO except that Caldera is screwing that up now.
Not that I don't think Linux is up to the task in general, or embedded Linux in particular.
In fact, in the old License Agreement for Win 3.1 I remember reading a line about how Windows should never be used for mission critical deployments.
'nuff said.

[lelio]

a line about how Windows should never be used for mission critical deployments
Doesn't the EULA for Java when you download it from Sun say about the same thing?

[Tribune7]

bump

[The KG9 Kid]

I think the system should be completely proprietary both in software and hardware.

Just get Texas Instruments to whip something up.

[NormsRevenge]

"ABORT, RETRY, OR FAIL" :-?

[tm22721]

NT is used on many carriers for disparate functions including navigation, steering, etc.

BUMP

[dyed_in_the_wool]

Doesn't the EULA for Java when you download it from Sun say about the same thing?

If not, it should. I'd never deploy Java for a life or death app. I'd probably do it in C, most likely on Unix, possibly on Linux.

[Texas_Longhorn]

[Erasmus]

Just get Texas Instruments to whip something up.

Like a 960B running PAM/D.

Ahhh, the old days.....

[stylin_geek]

Yeah, for whatever reason, SCO Open Server is considered a mature product, and no further upgrades will be created. So, the upper file limit size it will handle is 2 gigabyte. Unixware 7 is pretty good, it does some slick stuff when it comes to WAN and network printing, but I think Caldera is screwing that up too.