Highway POS System
Why Linux? Because it works. Because it does the job. Because, let's face it, it's free.
In late 1993, we started doing preliminary design work on a new retail petroleum point of sale (POS) unit. Basically, it's an electronic cash register (ECR) which also handles credit cards and controls fuel dispenser systems. We wanted to design a PC-based system to leverage the ease of availability and low prices associated with PC hardware.
Our sister division in the Netherlands had already began designing a new POS system for the European market. Since they had provided major components of our current successful products, we waited in heady anticipation for their design documents. Unfortunately, their design was based on MU-DOS, a multitasking DOS by Digital Research. We weren't very happy, and started researching alternative operating systems.
We had the following requirements:
Soft real time: While we didn't need a true real time system, we did need an operating system which would be able to handle over a dozen serial ports. These ports weren't always active, but we'd have bursts of communications from 9600 baud and higher, and we needed to be responsive in processing the incoming data. We also had to handle an experienced ECR cashier who would be entering keystrokes at a high rate and expecting a quick system response.
Multitasking: Preferably preemptive. What we really wanted was protected memory segments, so that one task wouldn't be able to corrupt another's data space. Being able to use multiple programs would allow us to change out specific programs without affecting the rest of the system.
Non-proprietary: We wanted an OS and development system that was supported by an outside agency using industry standard tools and utilities. We wanted to make our own workload as small as possible.
Inexpensive: The price point we were aiming at for the product didn't allow too much choice in the way of software.
In fairly short order, we had examined a number of candidates and decided to use SCO Unix w/Chorus Micro-kernel. Linux hadn't become an option—yet. We had heard of it, but didn't feel it was mature enough or commercially acceptable enough to warrant serious investigation.
Windows 3.1 still seemed too buggy, Windows NT was too expensive and too much of a resource hog.
QNX suffered from a lack of virtual memory. While we didn't have a real need for virtual memory, we wanted the ability to use it if the application needed it for some short but highly memory intensive operation.
OS/2 was originally high on our list, as our sister division was also looking at migrating to OS/2 for their product. Unfortunately, we consistently had problems with installation and found support extremely difficult to get.
SCO's only real problem seemed to be pricing. They wanted much too much, much too soon. While we started negotiating, we needed to start developing. We didn't want to purchase any SCO development systems, so we decided to start our development on Linux. Linux was fairly POSIX compliant, so we were confident we would be able to port our code without difficulty to another platform, particularly another Unix platform.
Differences in usability showed up almost immediately. I was working on the one SCO system we did have (an evaluation unit) and found the utility commands to be almost primitive compared to Linux. Things as simple as the recursive (-R) flag were missing from the chmod and chown commands. I found myself locating and acquiring more and more GNU tools. I was unable to get good or timely support for the SCO C compiler and the C++ front end. (They didn't have a native C++ compiler at the time.) I had difficulty in getting quality technical support. I had plenty of their time, but kept talking to support personnel who were not close enough to the module for which I needed information. I continually had to bother my SCO sales representative to renew my support contract (which was free due to the on-going negotiations).
On the Linux side of the partition, life was much smoother. The utilities were very advanced, the documentation reasonably good and the Linux newsgroups were a wealth of information and solutions. We tried using the SCO newsgroups, but found that, unless someone had experienced the exact same problem, little help was forthcoming. Linux newsgroups allowed us to contact the actual authors and maintainers of specific areas of code to better understand and troubleshoot problems. They were also fast. Within a matter of a day or two (sometimes less) we had fixes, workarounds and suggestions to try. It was almost like having a bunch of Linux experts on our payroll.
While upper management continued negotiating with SCO, engineering started quietly hoping that we could stay with Linux. However, we still had that commercial issue. We were afraid our customers wouldn't accept a free “hackers” OS. Luckily, Linux just kept gaining momentum. Linux 1.0 came out during this time, and suddenly companies like Caldera were making this wonderful OS a commercial product.
Suddenly, using Linux wasn't quite the issue it had been the previous year. Our customers still weren't sure, but their technical people started giving grudging acknowledgement that Linux just might be okay in a product. We decided to stay with Linux and drop SCO, who still wanted too much, too soon—we've never looked back.
Practical Task Scheduling Deployment
July 20, 2016 12:00 pm CDT
One of the best things about the UNIX environment (aside from being stable and efficient) is the vast array of software tools available to help you do your job. Traditionally, a UNIX tool does only one thing, but does that one thing very well. For example, grep is very easy to use and can search vast amounts of data quickly. The find tool can find a particular file or files based on all kinds of criteria. It's pretty easy to string these tools together to build even more powerful tools, such as a tool that finds all of the .log files in the /home directory and searches each one for a particular entry. This erector-set mentality allows UNIX system administrators to seem to always have the right tool for the job.
Cron traditionally has been considered another such a tool for job scheduling, but is it enough? This webinar considers that very question. The first part builds on a previous Geek Guide, Beyond Cron, and briefly describes how to know when it might be time to consider upgrading your job scheduling infrastructure. The second part presents an actual planning and implementation framework.
Join Linux Journal's Mike Diehl and Pat Cameron of Help Systems.
Free to Linux Journal readers.Register Now!
- SUSE LLC's SUSE Manager
- My +1 Sword of Productivity
- Murat Yener and Onur Dundar's Expert Android Studio (Wrox)
- Managing Linux Using Puppet
- Non-Linux FOSS: Caffeine!
- SuperTuxKart 0.9.2 Released
- Doing for User Space What We Did for Kernel Space
- Parsing an RSS News Feed with a Bash Script
- Google's SwiftShader Released
- Rogue Wave Software's Zend Server
With all the industry talk about the benefits of Linux on Power and all the performance advantages offered by its open architecture, you may be considering a move in that direction. If you are thinking about analytics, big data and cloud computing, you would be right to evaluate Power. The idea of using commodity x86 hardware and replacing it every three years is an outdated cost model. It doesn’t consider the total cost of ownership, and it doesn’t consider the advantage of real processing power, high-availability and multithreading like a demon.
This ebook takes a look at some of the practical applications of the Linux on Power platform and ways you might bring all the performance power of this open architecture to bear for your organization. There are no smoke and mirrors here—just hard, cold, empirical evidence provided by independent sources. I also consider some innovative ways Linux on Power will be used in the future.Get the Guide