Re: [9fans] OT: linux complexity trends

[forsyth@vitanuova.com]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 754 bytes --]

to be fair, i think it depends what that graph is measuring.  if it is
mainly more device drivers and protocols, that increases the scale of
linux, but not necessarily the complexity.  whether some of those
protocols and driver functions really need to be in the kernel might
of course be relevant.  the complexity also isn't a function of size,
but of construction (as a small example i think of all those #ifdefs
in the Linux kernel code i've seen, particularly the powerpc and arm
support).

on the other hand, i think rob observed once years ago at a conference that at
the time the entire source code of the Plan 9 kernel was smaller than
just the include files of some Unix systems, and i don't think that has
changed significantly.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2221 bytes --]

To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: [9fans] OT: linux complexity trends
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 12:41:53 +0000
Message-ID: <1171249689@snellwilcox.com>


Linux kernel size trend graph

http://durak.org/sean/pubs/kfc/kfc-size.gif

I wonder what the Plan9 one might look like?

-Steve





----------------------------------------------------------------------
The contents of this communication are confidential to the normal user of
the email address to which it was sent.  If you have received this email
in error, any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this
email is strictly prohibited.  If this is the case, please notify the
sender and delete this message.
----------------------------------------------------------------------