From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 10523 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2021 18:42:30 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 8 Feb 2021 18:42:30 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 88E6E9C902; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 04:42:29 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 231849BA50; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 04:42:15 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="f8DpZJXc"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id A6AD39BA50; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 04:42:13 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-ej1-f45.google.com (mail-ej1-f45.google.com [209.85.218.45]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEFDB9BA42 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 04:42:12 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-ej1-f45.google.com with SMTP id b9so26594375ejy.12 for ; Mon, 08 Feb 2021 10:42:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=DLmu2j1wm6fWzRy/gwGtD5mtSwXZJWPhf8qPTPIwESE=; b=f8DpZJXcPfWBj2C+DV4LUDHlwv5qzWb+J/uTKWgJesJ4UKoWmqyEPNUen/qy23XKvc 0RwjOcZBU6l616qthoB3WDcxQP66fnoUzsZGLs8PZ2VdEsJxqen/s7uLXW0lcZSNZLKX RcvI51K85MRtKb2X+c6xS0SgOCNUI9Xu0V+o72pEwf7z2TBYCgpM7+qcQ8W50Wm2Msoj r7xkHxtbCtRQklII4xlhLNmYeMmB9zjSqEdb+fqnsJoL9a+L3X7Ptjhx1zMk35V9jvv4 waLG/MRc10Npo6sM3OKtqYTrNqjoOcLQHB6JS+XmDkK498UjZzAMVJCzdet2IjEaOZsj UfUw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=DLmu2j1wm6fWzRy/gwGtD5mtSwXZJWPhf8qPTPIwESE=; b=KhCypHRGeYgKmPkPSr+bnn0nHY224Kzmlg17g3/EprkMW8pnf2HzeT1YG6xsCyntzG sD6+2dYqtQEw4gDN87FDiWeXS+HlaHGnVKavuBRbApCp5XKss1bZg/H0tTptZWp5300e +j9dJbtb+2MvGSRhjUcRulE57zLywBPYOqORM9tylHThAqIFtVy3Kt2CLi5n3uiEj2UV c1zkrwnvHovfW0HslaEpZd3PZbor1pbVqnN69f/ngpkvWXPNJXi8Z2v5WhF/VuJXJCzE b6Km2yUr+egGeY0B9eoKFZpKkgk1zQpbbGB0Grxe7wQWq2/TuqU6Bs6rkqhi+siIgWxN jcdw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530n1eZe0VVELi0JSc+XaIPpZumS5wqfGX6jl7yJ4gRtth1yCG1e miM9chFPERo3XigOzGB8kXqyH61Hwc7YoW5/H4HfD0Vy3Bc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxDlASA0uu+I1flD9+AEnMi8F9GTUxYHZ5ohC8Ih0muggwXodVd5m+BYKCHXYSc0Gc0HeDs61VavwZXFpoFo1g= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:32d1:: with SMTP id k17mr12987792ejk.141.1612809731590; Mon, 08 Feb 2021 10:42:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Henry Bent Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2021 13:42:00 -0500 Message-ID: To: Will Senn Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000244f9c05bad787c3" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Macs and future unix derivatives X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: TUHS main list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000244f9c05bad787c3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, 8 Feb 2021 at 13:12, Will Senn wrote: > > Anyhow, I have thoroughly enjoyed the Mac ride, but with Catalina, the > ride got really bumpy (too much phone home, no more 32 bit programs and > since Adobe Acrobat X, which I own, outright, isn't 64 bit, among other > apps, this just in not an option for me), and with Big Sur, it's gotten > worse, potholes, sinkholes, and suchlike, and the interface is downright > patronizing (remember Microsoft Bob?). So, here I am, Mr. > Run-Any-Cutting-Edge-OS anytime guy, hanging on tooth and nail to Mac OS > Mojave where I still have a modicum of control over my environment. > I hear you on this one. I'm sticking with Mojave as well on my Mac laptop, but part of that is also because I refuse to give up on what is now an almost eight year old machine that has no real problems and has all of the hardware and ports I want. Apple loves to move quickly and abandon compatibility, and in that respect it's an interesting counterpoint to Linux or a *BSD where you can have decades old binaries that still run. > > And a bonus question, why, oh why, can't we have a contained kernel that > provides minimal functionality (dare I say microkernel), that is securable, > and layers above it that other stuff (everything else) can run on with > auditing and suchlike for traceability? > Oh no, not this can of worms... I bet Clem has quite a bit to say about this, but I'll boil it down to this: Mach bombed spectacularly (check out the Wikipedia article, it's pretty decent) and set the idea in people's heads that microkernels were not the way to go. If you wanted to write a microkernel OS today IMHO you'd need to be fully UNIX compatible, and you'd need to natively write EVERY syscall so that performance isn't horrible. This has turned out to be much harder than one might think at first glance. Just ask the GNU Hurd folks... All said, this is probably a space where the time and effort required to squeeze the last 10%, or 5%, or 1% of performance out of the hardware just isn't worth the time investment. -Henry --000000000000244f9c05bad787c3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, 8 Feb 2021 at 13:12, Will Senn &l= t;will.senn@gmail.com> wrote:=
=20 =20 =20

Anyhow, I have thoroughly enjoyed the Mac ride, but with Catalina, the ride got really bumpy (too much phone home, no more 32 bit programs and since Adobe Acrobat X, which I own, outright, isn't 64 bit, among other apps, this just in not an option for me), and with Big Sur, it's gotten worse, potholes, sinkholes, and suchlike, and the interface is downright patronizing (remember Microsoft Bob?). So, here I am, Mr. Run-Any-Cutting-Edge-OS anytime guy, hanging on tooth and nail to Mac OS Mojave where I still have a modicum of control over my environment.
=

I hear you on this one.=C2=A0 I'm stic= king with Mojave as well on my Mac laptop, but part of that is also because= I refuse to give up on what is now an almost eight year old machine that h= as no real problems and has all of the hardware and ports I want.=C2=A0 App= le loves to move quickly and abandon compatibility, and in that respect it&= #39;s an interesting counterpoint to Linux or a *BSD where you can have dec= ades old binaries that still run.
=C2=A0

And a bonus question, why, oh why, can't we have a contained kernel that provides minimal functionality (dare I say microkernel), that is securable, and layers above it that other stuff (everything else) can run on with auditing and suchlike for traceability?

Oh no,= not this can of worms... I bet Clem has quite a bit to say about this, but= I'll boil it down to this: Mach bombed spectacularly (check out the Wi= kipedia article, it's pretty decent) and set the idea in people's h= eads that microkernels were not the way to go.=C2=A0 If you wanted to write= a microkernel OS today IMHO you'd need to be fully UNIX compatible, an= d you'd need to natively write EVERY syscall so that performance isn= 9;t horrible.=C2=A0 This has turned out to be much harder than one might th= ink at first glance.=C2=A0 Just ask the GNU Hurd folks...=C2=A0 All said, t= his is probably a space where the time and effort required to squeeze the l= ast 10%, or 5%, or 1% of performance out of the hardware just isn't wor= th the time investment.

-Henry
=
--000000000000244f9c05bad787c3--