From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <5F4F61B6-1CDD-434C-BBE8-EA37BC4C2239@gmail.com> From: Patrick Kelly To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> In-Reply-To: <31ab45d5d167967b7f2d8295682c11fa@quanstro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 22:58:23 -0400 References: <31ab45d5d167967b7f2d8295682c11fa@quanstro.net> Subject: Re: [9fans] linux stats in last year from linuxcon Topicbox-Message-UUID: 742df1c0-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Sep 21, 2009, at 10:33 PM, erik quanstrom wrote: >>> "We're getting bloated and huge. Yes, it's a problem," said >>> Torvalds." >> >> So may be Tanenbaum was right, after all, there's a reason we make >> things modular. > > rob, presotto, ken and phil did not agree with tanenbaum's > ideas about modular kernels. > > this was a direct response to ast many years ago. it was > hard to dig up when i did so in 2006. perhaps someone > has a better link: > > - Microkernels are the way to go > False unless your only goal is to get papers published. > Plan 9's kernel is a fraction of the size of any microkernel > we know and offers more functionality and comparable > or often better performance. It was somewhat sarcastic. I'm aware each type of kernel has it's specific areas it excels in. I was poking fun at the Mono v Micro debate. We as people don't always agree on a subject. I can't agree completely with some of the Bell labs staff on some subjects. C or C++ for example, I strongly prefer Ada. Does that mean I don't agree with Plan 9's design? Far from it, almost every machine I've set up either runs Plan 9 or is an embedded system. > > - erik >