From: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Ga?l Le Mignot <kilobug@freesurf.fr>,
Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>,
Christian Reichert <c.reichert@resolution.de>,
John Bradford <john@grabjohn.com>,
lkml@lrsehosting.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rms@gnu.org,
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Subject: Re: [OT] HURD vs Linux/HURD
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 11:45:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030719184519.GB24197@work.bitmover.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030719194123.A16317@infradead.org>
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 07:41:23PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 11:12:49AM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > The microkernel part of any reasonable microkernel is tiny.
>
> And who says Mach is a reasonable microkernel :)
Yup, more like a maxikernel :)
That was my reaction on reading the code years ago and it hasn't changed.
I used to know one of the main guys who did the QNX microkernel (Dan
Hildebrandt, RIP 1998) and he talked about how a real microkernel was
never touched by more than 3 people and each of them spent as much
time removing stuff as adding it.
Mach is kinda on the bloated side, I always questioned the wisdom of
the GNU HURD being based on Mach, seemed like a bad call. But then,
unless you have an extremely well controlled dev team, any micro kernel
is a bad call, it's going to bloat out.
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-19 18:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-19 15:03 [OT] HURD vs Linux/HURD John Bradford
2003-07-19 15:02 ` Christian Reichert
2003-07-19 17:09 ` Gaël Le Mignot
2003-07-19 17:23 ` Larry McVoy
2003-07-19 17:46 ` Gaël Le Mignot
2003-07-19 18:12 ` Larry McVoy
2003-07-19 18:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-07-19 18:45 ` Larry McVoy [this message]
2003-07-19 20:07 ` Gaël Le Mignot
2003-07-19 20:05 ` Gaël Le Mignot
2003-07-19 20:28 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-07-19 22:03 ` Larry McVoy
2003-07-19 22:23 ` Alan Cox
2003-07-19 22:33 ` Roman Zippel
2003-07-20 6:35 ` Andre Hedrick
2003-07-19 18:58 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2003-07-19 22:42 ` Greg KH
2003-07-19 15:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-07-19 15:16 ` Linux Kernel Mailing List
2003-07-20 6:32 ` Andre Hedrick
2003-07-20 0:07 ` Theodore Ts'o
2003-07-20 13:23 ` Charles E. Youse
2003-07-20 13:41 ` David Lloyd
2003-07-20 14:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-07-20 15:27 ` Brian McGroarty
2003-07-22 4:52 ` Miles Bader
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-07-20 17:24 John Bradford
2003-07-20 13:49 John Bradford
2003-07-20 16:59 ` Horst von Brand
2003-07-19 10:33 Bitkeeper John Bradford
2003-07-19 14:00 ` [OT] HURD vs Linux/HURD Linux Kernel Mailing List
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030719184519.GB24197@work.bitmover.com \
--to=lm@bitmover.com \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=c.reichert@resolution.de \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=john@grabjohn.com \
--cc=kilobug@freesurf.fr \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkml@lrsehosting.com \
--cc=rms@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).