Mailing List ArchiveSupport open source code!
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: Power Mac Port and Mach 3.0 kernel
- To: tlug@example.com
- Subject: Re: Power Mac Port and Mach 3.0 kernel
- From: turnbull@example.com (Stephen J. Turnbull)
- Date: Tue, 13 Feb 96 18:58 JST
- In-Reply-To: <Pine.HPP.3.91.960213183017.2856A-100000@example.com> (message from Craig Oda on Tue, 13 Feb 1996 18:37:12 +0900 (JST))
- Reply-To: tlug@example.com
- Sender: owner-tlug@example.com
>>>>> "Craig" == Craig Oda <craig@example.com> writes: Craig> On Tue, 13 Feb 1996, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: >> I'm fairly sure that Linux does not use the Mach microkernel, >> and I'm also fairly sure that Linux cannot use the Mach >> microkernel because although the Mach kernel is freely >> distributable for research purposes, it is encumbered with a >> no-commercial-use license. You can >> From the OSF Research Institute, Craig> The OSF Research Institute has made significant Craig> improvements and extensions to the original CMU Mach3.0 Craig> microkernel, and the result, named OSF MK, is still Craig> available for free. The latest versions of OSF/1 are based Craig> on OSF MK but are encumbered by commercial licenses. [snip] Craig> we started from an existing monolithic kernel and we wanted Craig> to maximize the code reuse ratio to make it easier to track Craig> new releases of Linux and leverage the Linux community Craig> effort. But this is *not* Linux, this is a Linux-derived OS called "OSF MK". Note the wording "track new releases of Linux". Linux is obviously the "existing monolithic kernel". So they plan to keep up with new releases of Linux, but OSF MK and Linux are not an integrated product yet. This is worth looking at, even if it's not a "multi-server". There are a lot of advantages to the micro-kernel architecture. If the micro-kernel itself is stable, then there's a lot more leeway for bugs in everything else. In the long run this is likely to be a lot more modular than Linux with modules. (I guess I was wrong, and you can't run several single-servers at the same time; a single server is exactly that, it would seem; it must be the only server running on top of the kernel or it gets confused. I think I now remember that the single server also provides a lot more services, eg, file systems, process management, and so on, than the modularity philosophy would like.) Do you have an URL offhand? -- Stephen J. Turnbull Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Yaseppochi-Gumi University of Tsukuba http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp/ Tennodai 1-1-1, Tsukuba, 305 JAPAN turnbull@example.com
- References:
- Re: Power Mac Port and Mach 3.0 kernel
- From: Craig Oda <craig@example.com>
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: Power Mac Port and Mach 3.0 kernel
- Next by Date: net access info. request
- Prev by thread: Re: Power Mac Port and Mach 3.0 kernel
- Next by thread: Java Dev Kit Win '95 or Linux
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links