Re: LINUX is obsolete Linux Inside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Re: LINUX is obsolete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      /