[Info-vax] [OT] Bare metal definition, was: Re: VMS port to x86

[Bob Koehler]

In article <jksihn$5ho$1 at news.albasani.net>, Jan-Erik Soderholm <jan-erik.soderholm at telia.com> writes:
> Bob Koehler wrote 2012-03-27 17:49:
>> In article<jkqkjv$p1i$1 at news.albasani.net>, Jan-Erik Soderholm<jan-erik.soderholm at telia.com>  writes:
>>>
>>> But Linux runs on "bare metal". And if that part is builtin in whatever
>>> the developer calles "the product", then what ? Doesn't "the product" then
>>> run on "bare metal"? Yes, one component of "the product" is some parts
>>> usualy called "Linux", but so what ? Why should the customer/user care ?
>>
>>     Because the Linux kernel can't handle some of the hard real-time
>>     applications that the user might have.
>>
> 
> But that is a completly different question.
> It has nothing to do with the "bare metall" discussion.

    OK, that makes as much sense as mush.  How can a problem caused by
    not truely running on bare metal not be relavent to a discussion of
    what "bare metal" really means?