Re: [9fans] Plan 9 rejected from GSoC 2012

[tlaronde@polynum.com]

On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 12:47:46PM +0100, Paschke Christoph wrote:
>
> I also got some idea to get engaged with Minix especially according to the idea of the Microkernel and the reincarnation drivers etc. But one part I got shocked was the amount of RAM this system needs for nearly nothing and also the missing of nearly each hardware support. So, at Plan 9 you see the old profs around the Bell Labs at work if you compare that both systems.

Many years ago, I was attracted to "microkernel" by the very word,
thinking it was a "small" resources thing, that one could extend when
needed and only with what was needed. And the "big" surprise with
"micro" kernel is that they are huge; don't perform well unless a huge
amount is written in... assembly etc.

And I don't know if my english is at fault, but the paper about Plan9
seems to me to make fun of this academic frenzy about these huge
resources hog called microkernels, and that Plan9 can not attract such
attention and so many papers since it is not in the trend, and does the
job while being small...

If the U.E. has selected Minix, then it's sure: it's a dead end... They
have this gift (helped with lobbying) to always choose the wrong
direction.

--
        Thierry Laronde <tlaronde +AT+ polynum +dot+ com>
                      http://www.kergis.com/
Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89  250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C