Re: [9fans] Re: what about microkernel?

["LiteStar numnums" <litestar@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1605 bytes --]

TUD:OS is pretty neat. I'd like to take Nemesis out for a spin as well, but
I've not the time now.

On 10/7/07, David Leimbach <leimy2k@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/6/07, Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net> wrote:
> > > you mean, the all 9 subsystems works through 9P and filesystems,
> > > that safe for kernel?
> >
> > the kernel doesn't actually implement all that much, and most complex
> things
> > are outside the kernel.  the biggest exceptions are networking
> > and low-level device drivers, but the interface to those is small,
> > or even tiny.  the device drivers aren't that big either.
> > the network has been in and out of the kernel at different times over
> the years.
> >
> > qnx is probably the most reasonable so-called microkernel i've seen
> described
> > (but i haven't seen their code).
>
> It's "open sourced" now, as of a few weeks ago.
>
> Ever looked at the L4 family of microkernels?
>



-- 
    "By cosmic rule, as day yields night, so winter summer, war peace,
plenty famine. All things change. Air penetrates the lump of myrrh, until
the joining bodies die and rise again in smoke called incense."

    "Men do not know how that which is drawn in different directions
harmonises with itself. The harmonious structure of the world depends upon
opposite tension like that of the bow and the lyre."

    "This universe, which is the same for all, has not been made by any god
or man, but it always has been, is, and will be an ever-living fire,
kindling itself by regular measures and going out by regular measures"
-- Heraclitus

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2133 bytes --]