News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:GRiSP – Erlang-based IoT hardware platform by davidw on Tuesday December 06, 2016 @07:05PM (#13119389)
I wonder what the difference looks like in terms of the total system footprint.
Re:GRiSP – Erlang-based IoT hardware platform by thenewwazoo on Tuesday December 06, 2016 @08:11PM (#13119733)
Massive. NERVES requires Linux, plus system libraries. I've built RTEMS applications in the tens of kilobytes. Both require BEAM, of course, plus the actual Erlang application itself.
Re:GRiSP – Erlang-based IoT hardware platform by elcritch on Wednesday December 07, 2016 @12:18AM (#13120630)
Nerves is around the 10-20 MB range. The main downside of the Grisp system I could see would be that nerves has a really nice two phase firmware update story, and that isn't mentioned in Grisp that I've found. IMHO, the remote firmware update and tooling is a "killer" feature of nerves.
Re:GRiSP – Erlang-based IoT hardware platform by peerst on Wednesday December 07, 2016 @07:51AM (#13122144)
Firmware update in the field is important but only a small aspect of a embedded system (one that really needs to work).

But Erlang already offers a lot around releases out of the box and in our case The VM + the whole "OS" is just one file to swap so we don't have a lot of problems one has if Linux + Erlang + Application needs to be updated.

FWIW: for larger Embedded systems we use FreeBSD + nanobsd wich solves a lot of the above mentioned problems. Update image verification and running the update is about 200 lines of Erlang code. And nanobsd comes with the normal FreeBSD system (builds disk/flash filesystem images with multiple partitions for easy update -- runs from one swap to the other)

Re:GRiSP – Erlang-based IoT hardware platform by davidw on Wednesday December 07, 2016 @12:11AM (#13120610)
> Both require BEAM, of course, plus the actual Erlang application itself.

Exactly - that part is not tiny, so I wonder what the two look like in comparison.