> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russell McOrmond [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 12:44 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [ilug-cal] Microkernel?
>
>
> On Thu, 6 Jun 2002, Sarcar, Shourya C (MED) wrote:
>
> > I cannot foresee a microkernel based Linux offshoot (which
> wouldn't be
> > Linux) which with a driver interface compatible to that of Linux.
>
> Why?
>
> There is already considerable code sharing between the
> various BSD based
> kernels and Linux, and will be quite a bit of sharing with
> HURD, so why
> would any other thread be different?
>
Architecturally, these are pretty much different beast, HURD and Linux.
I am not sure about what and how much code is being shared.
But I can tell you darn well that the SiS6295 SVGA driver that runs X on
my Linux box will not work for HURD ;-)
> My brain sometimes thinks post-Microsoft even before they
> are gone.
I am not that optimistic but I would nevertheless be overjoyed if you
are proven correct.
>
> > Especially to keep the corporate support flowing, it is necessary to
> > provide a united picture. It can be very hard for the
> average IT manager
> > to make a choice between user-thread and kernel threaded
> kernels for his
> > ERP application :-).
>
> I don't see the relevance to them. If the ERP application is Open
> Source itself, they will be able to compile it on everything
> from a tiny
> PC to a mainframe, and won't really care what type of kernel
> any of these
> are running as long as all the API's are compatable.
I dont see a reason why Open Source has to guarantee portability .
Anyway , that is besides the point.
The interesting thing is that not all applications that are used in
corporate houses/business organisations are Open Source. (Now that is an
understatement). I do not know of any commercially used ERP application
that is an Open Source effort.
Take a look at Clearcase. Ratioanl's flagship Source Code Management
product is so intertwined with the kernel it will not cleanly run with a
meagre XFS patch. So much for API compatibility. Actually it depends on
what API cmopatibility you are talking about . If it is the Unix POSIX
layer, then you are there almost 80% I would say. Most of the advanced
apps now being developed either tamper with lower level driver
interfaces or the POSIX layer itself in most flavors is non-transparent,
i.e the implementations come out.
Shourya
>
> A properly written application should not know or care what
> kernel it is
> running on.
>
> ---
> Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
> See http://weblog.flora.ca/ for announcements, activities,
> and opinions
> http://www.flora.ca/osss2002/ "Open Source Solutions Showcase" (Past)
> Next: GOSLINGS (Getting Open Source and Linux INto GovernmentS)
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the body
> "unsubscribe ilug-cal" and an empty subject line.
> FAQ: http://www.ilug-cal.org/help/faq_list.html
>
--
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the body
"unsubscribe ilug-cal" and an empty subject line.
FAQ: http://www.ilug-cal.org/help/faq_list.html
