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
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
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
 ICQ: 1503733