Hello Group, Hello Sudhanshu, Hello Kapil Jain, Thanks for your mails.
Hope my mail doesnt seem like deviation from topic- but am taking liberty to share my experience. I was double-minded about writing long mails-- but given my own interest-- I am writing in--- and if there are a few people (say atleast 2 or 3)-- I am happy to give some of my time-- and we can even have a kernel hack/discussion session sometime. Basically, you need to do things step-by-step to get exposure-- because many things are different from impression you'll get from books-- and until you yourself spend some weeks digging in-- till then, you will risk getting stuck and never finishing a project. > >Please Advise, though the above posts were very useful ,thanx guys. > Has someone tried to understand these project oriented courses on OS > from renouned Universities like OS/161 , pint OS and xv6. ? At present > my examinations are going on, so could not devote time in R&D. If > someone tried anything ,please share ur experience and your > knowledge. > > This project of OS development requires people , who can contribute > there skills. If this was done in Berkeley then why cant it be done >here again with latest technology and Web support? > Have you had a chance yet to compile the OS and also re-build the toolchain (gcc, bin-utils etc) from sources ? If not, I suggest you do that. Dont just re-build the kernel; also rebuild bin-utils; gcc and the entire tool-chain from sources-- the first time I did that (years back)-- the results and problems were beyond what I expected-- and doing this will teach you a lot. Also, there is a book by Tannenbaum, about OS Design and Implementation-- which has entire source code of minix os-- and which I suggest you work through-- because many end of chapter exercises will expose you to many interesting concepts-- which otherwise it might take you months or years to get exposed to. The book I am mentioning has the entire source code of minix operating system-- which was even Linus Torvalds' starting point. You should try to build that source code --- A lot of things look doable-- and they are-- but I suggest you do things step by step, deepening your own knowledge and exposure before you go deeper-- because many times one ends up re-inventing the wheel and doing things that others have already done. You should gain exposure and experience with different things-- so that when you embark upon your own journey of making a OS-- you produce results. I have also sent you a unicast mail-- respond to that when you get a chance. I am happy to help and/or share knowledge-- so feel free to write to me-- either on list OR unicast. > >Important: I think microkernel approach is quite reliable and feasible >at initial stages, of OS development. But Linux kernel is monolithic >and its kernel code is quite large. So I suppose , one should go with >both microkernel and monolithic kernel for combined >functionalities..i.e a hybrid kernel would be a best choice. > even this topic can be food for lots of discussion-- and time and opportunity permitting-- it will be good to someday dig deeper and share thoughts on this. Right now, I am tempted to make remarks like "because xxx therefore yyy is not good even thought it seemingly offers advantages aaa, bbb, ccc"-- but yes-- such statements make sense only if one has the time and energy to qualify and quantify one's generalizations-- otherwise it's just random argument-- hence suggesting you deepen your own knowledge and exposure. Regards, Nalin On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Sudhanshu Shekhar Sharma < [email protected]> wrote: <snip> -- l...@iitd - http://tinyurl.com/ycueutm
