On Wed, 1 Sep 1999, Matthew Vernon wrote: > On Wed, 1 Sep 1999, Michael Bacarella wrote: > [snip] > > Not to imply that just because something is written in assembler means > > that it's always smaller and faster, but, it's written entirely in > > assembler! Of course it'd be small and fast. :)
Written entirely in assembler? Sounds a bit difficult to port... > > (Unless I'm missing something) > > > > > Note that: > > > a) L4 is actually a small microkernel; > > > b) OSKit has been showing off that it is useful to create an OS > > > infrastructure surrounding memory allocation schemes in order to be > > > supportive of specialized languages; > > > c) Most early microkernels seem to have been monolithic systems, unlike > > > Hurd. > > > > I think that theoretically, the Hurd would be much better off ditching > > GNUMach for L4, but there's a lot stopping something like that. > > IMHO we'd be better off with Fiasco (written in C++ (which is kindof a > downer), but GPL, and more portable). I'd like to make a pitch then for Fluke which seems to descend from Mach so porting the Hurd might be easier than to other microkernels. It's also GPL. And I like the Recursive Virtual Machine idea. Maybe you guys could provide URL's to L4 / Fiasco so I could have a look at those? > > Possibly some better publicity for switching, because we's need people! I think the kernel issue needs to be resolved because recruiting people to an OS project where the kernel is a known dead end will not be easy. > > But, I have no status here, so I can shut up now. Same goes for me :) Regards, Pontus
