Talk:Just enough operating system

VxWorks is not a JeOS
You can't call an operating system a JeOS. Having the ability to choose which parts of the kernel you want to build does not make something a JeOS. By that logic the Linux kernel itself is a JeOS. Or MS-DOS. The term is connected specifically with Software appliances. A JeOS is the basis for a software appliance or virtual appliance. Show me a software/virtual appliance based on VxWorks and I'll change my mind. LirazSiri (talk) 00:22, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * What do you mean by software appliance? VxWorks is an RTOS designed for embedded systems. Since a software appliance may (by the definition in its article) run on an embedded system, I don't see that it is excluded here. In any case, hardware is often simulated in a VM anyway for testing and prototyping purposes, training and simulation etc.


 * VxWorks is more than just the kernel it has lots of libraries etc. It's a full blown OS, and you can configure which parts of it you need. MS-DOS is not a JeOS since it is monolothinc, but yeah there are distributions of Linux that I would say, under your definition, are JeOS.


 * As far as I see, you've got a definition that is either so narrow it comes down to basically one or two packages&mdash; pretty pointless;&mdash; or one that is broad enough to include these things&mdash; maybe useful to distinguish a "heavy" OS like Windows or even Linux from this kind of OS&mdash; or a term so broad that it means little more than OS.


 * If you look at VxWorks you will see that it is used in various hardware appliances suhch as firewalls and routers, as well as in things like aircraft and military (which is where I first used it many many years ago). Declaration of Interest: I do not use VxWorks now and am not affiliated to the maker, Wind River Systems, in any way.


 * I looked at software appliance and computer appliance; I notice you linked the latter to the former and (not to my great surprise) had a big hand in editing the former. I am sure of your good faith but I wonder if perhaps you work on software appliances and have a slightly narrower view of what they are, or what a JeOS is, than others might?


 * In any case, by analogy with the "computer appliance" article", I don't see any reason not to put it down as a link, even in a "See Also" section, or something. Perhaps it might be better to link both ways a "see also" to and from this article and "Real time operating system") (which does, quite rightly, link to VxWorks)?


 * Best wishes SimonTrew (talk) 14:09, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for explaining your position. I agree that MSDOS is not a good example and that JeOS is not yet a rigorously defined technical concept. What I understand it to currently mean is the "minimal core" of a software or virtual appliance. Yes I am a developer of software appliances myself, but I have nothing to gain or loose from the inclusion of VxWorks in this article, it just doesn't seem to be appropriate. If we extend the definition don't we run the risk of overlapping with the definition of an embedded operating system? Most of which I believe are highly configurable. In your opinion could any embedded operating system fit the definition of a JeOS? LirazSiri (talk) 22:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Categories
I've added a new category "Just Enough Operating Systems" and put this article, and the two JEOS's to which it refers, into it, in parallel to the categorization of other OS's. I don't think this is controversial and is separate from the VxWorks talk above-- indeed, I have not put VxWorks into that category. SimonTrew (talk) 18:20, 6 April 2009 (UTC)