My goals are quick wins.  There are safety applications using Linux that either don’t need safety certification or whose standards allow Linux to be treated as-is, i.e. software of unknown pedigree.  Just small improvements to Linux or relatively small additional pieces of information provided with Linux could offer a lot of value to these developers, allowing them to build safer products.  Examples: code improvements, new modules that add or support software safety measures, white papers, manuals, design guides, fault analyses, reports (verification, validation, review, etc.), release notes including known issues, etc.  In a way, this is perhaps a scaled-down version of Elana’s (3).

That being said… I don’t know if this is exactly what the community needs.

I think (if we haven’t done so already) we should go out far and wide across not only ELISA but Linux developers in general to find out what they really need.

Are there enough developers of safety applications using Linux that are okay with treating Linux as-is, making it worthwhile to pursue my stated goal?

Or are most folks trying to develop systems for self-driving cars using Linux and ultimately need compliance with ISO 26262?

If the latter is true, start with Elana’s (1).  It’s going to be a lot of work.

Jason