From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1076)
From: Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <31ab45d5d167967b7f2d8295682c11fa@quanstro.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:48:30 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <8C898F89-2D6D-4E1C-9F4E-9060358A421F@gmail.com>
References: <31ab45d5d167967b7f2d8295682c11fa@quanstro.net>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] linux stats in last year from linuxcon
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 746d921c-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Sep 21, 2009, at 9:33 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.
>

IMHO, that statement applies to existing microkernel implementations
(at the time? perhaps still?) -- its not clear to me that they
inherently must be that way.
Likely their use as "fuel for papers and PhD's" contributed to their
bloat.

       -eric