Re: LINUX is obsolete Linux Inside
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: LINUX is obsolete

in article <1992Jan30.195850.7023@epas.toronto.edu>, meggin@epas.utoronto.ca (David Megginson) says:
> Nntp-Posting-Host: epas.utoronto.ca
> 
> In article <1992Jan30.185728.26477feustel@netcom.COM> feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) writes:
>>
>>That's ok. Einstein got lousy grades in math and physics.
> 
> And Dan Quayle got low grades in political science. I think that there
> are more Dan Quayles than Einsteins out there... ;-)

What a horrible thought !

But on the points about microkernel v monolithic, isnt this partly an
artifact of the language being used ? MINIX may well be designed as a
microkernel system, but in the end you still end up with a large
monolithic chunk of binary data that gets loaded in as "the OS". Isnt it
written as separate programs simply because C does not support the idea
of multiple processes within a single piece of monolithic code. Is there
any real difference between a microkernel written as several pieces of C
and a monolithic kernel written in something like OCCAM ? I would have
thought that in this case the monolithic design would be a better one
than the micorkernel style since with the advantage of inbuilt
language concurrency the kernel could be made even more modular than the
MINIX one is.

Anyone for MINOX :-)

-bat.
-- 
-Pete French. (the -bat. )         / 
Adaptive Systems Engineering      /