From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Yi Li" Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: Threads: Sewing badges of honor onto a Kernel User-Agent: Pan/0.13.3 (That cat's something I can't explain) Message-Id: References: <0265d55e51ecbc45b2e17f94df45c3f5@plan9.escet.urjc.es> To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 23:17:00 +0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Topicbox-Message-UUID: 1993b248-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 > And I suspect that the design philosophy of L4 has a certain > degree of impact on Linux. No proof, just a guess. On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 11:23:44 +0000, Fco.J.Ballesteros wrote: >> I don't think so. The claim of L4 is that =C2=B5kernels are non-portab= le >> (which makes sense) and that they must be coded in a non-portable way, >> The orignial one was assembly, and then fiasco is a reimplementation o= f L4 >> in C (mostly). >>=20 >> Linux is UNIX, mostly, if we forget about its bloat. I understand that. Having impact does not necessarily mean to agree or even to be similar. What I meant was that from Linus's posting here I got the impression that he might have read those L4 papers. Best, E