Micro Kernel Question
Pat Wendorf
beholder@bespin.cx
Wed, 30 Jun 1999 21:17:43 -0400
Francois-Rene Rideau wrote:
> PS: on a completely different, I made an analysis of reasons
> behind the failure of HURD as an OS architecture,
> which I published some time ago in the TUNES Glossary:
> http://www.tunes.org/papers/Glossary/index.html#microkernel
Wow, that one was a real eye opener. I take it what you're saying is
that Linux is
better than Mach, but a system of Interconnected high-level compiled and
optimized
software is better? I imagine it might work, but aren't you just
providing actors
which provide the same functionality as the discrete modules of the
uKernel?
Couldn't that end up being a mess anyways?
When I was planning UniOS, the same idea of kernel less design came up,
but there
were implementation issues we just couldn't get around. For example,
there must be
a way for objects to communicate with each other, but how do they know
where each
one is in memory? For that I think you need some kind of area of memory
that is
dedicated as a symbol dictionary of sorts? Or possibly an actor
handling actor,
which I guess would classify as a kernel wouldn't it?
--
--------------------------------
Pat Wendorf
beholder@ican.net
ICQ: 1503733
--------------------------------