[Fedora-electronic-lab-list] Re: Embedded SIG

Ralf Corsepius ralf.corsepius at rtems.org
Mon Feb 16 06:22:51 UTC 2009

Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
> During FOSDEM, I talked to Max and Greg requesting them to get someone
> inside RH to include eCos on fedora. However it is not very clear for
> many people in terms of embedded where is the limit. Is it only design
> tools or should provide an additional OS ? This question has popped
> several times and needs your input to clarify our roadmap.
I don't regard this as a problem specific to embedded package. To me, 
"embedded packages" are normal packages like any others, i.e. are 
subject to the normal rules for including packages into Fedora.

The actual problems with embedded packages are elsewhere:
- Their target audience is comparatively small
=> Little "end-user demand", little "developer interest".

- Embedded packages tend to be huge.
=> Mainstream users will accuse "Embedded stuff" to unnecessarily bloat 

- Embedded packages tend to be technically complex (e.g. 
cross-compilation) and to diverge from "native packaging" (e.g. shipping 
source code as contents)
=> Fedora's review/maintenance infrastructure (reviews) and tools (esp: 
rpm) are not in a shape to make "getting such embedded packages into 
Fedora" easy. They often end-up in rejected, withdrawn submissions 
combined with endless discussions on details.

- Due to the limited audience of "embedded products", the 
overhead/difficulties getting packages into Fedora implies and different 
objectives ("embedded vendor" vs. Fedora/RH), vendors of "embedded 
products" tend to provide packages of their own.
=> Adding their packages to Fedora is of limited interest to them.


More information about the Fedora-electronic-lab-list mailing list