diff options
author | Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com> | 2013-09-25 21:59:24 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com> | 2013-09-25 21:59:24 +0200 |
commit | bba1488c7be842e5d0311ffa6541373d63b1164c (patch) | |
tree | 383f15ec9c57978e5675f0ba03bd94b7cf407731 /microkernel/discussion.mdwn | |
parent | afce216e724614c6c01ed3ec85f6d5a50dc5037d (diff) | |
parent | eccdd13dd3c812b8f0b3d046ef9d8738df00562a (diff) |
Merge remote-tracking branch 'fp/master'
Conflicts:
open_issues/secure_file_descriptor_handling.mdwn
Diffstat (limited to 'microkernel/discussion.mdwn')
-rw-r--r-- | microkernel/discussion.mdwn | 40 |
1 files changed, 39 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/microkernel/discussion.mdwn b/microkernel/discussion.mdwn index a5a73e18..f5626f6c 100644 --- a/microkernel/discussion.mdwn +++ b/microkernel/discussion.mdwn @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] [[!tag open_issue_documentation]] -IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-07-26: +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-07-26 < antrik> Tekk_`: regarding microkernels: the basic idea, and really the *only* fundamental difference, is that they isolate things in separate @@ -22,3 +22,41 @@ IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-07-26: these are secondary effects: such choices can also be implemented in a monolithic architecture -- and not necessarily harder. just less obvious in some cases... + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2013-08-28 + + <Spyro> ok question + <Spyro> what is the big advantage of microkernels over monolithic kernels + as you guys see it? + <Spyro> is it entirely for the benefit of developers or are there actaully + practical advantages? + <kilobug> Spyro: there are many advantages, at least in theory, in terms of + modularity, flexibility, stability, scalability, security, ... which are + for everyone + <braunr> Spyro: of course some advantages are practical + <braunr> for me, the main advantage is system extensibility + <braunr> you can replace system services at runtime + <braunr> and on the hurd, you can do it as an unprivileged user + <braunr> (the direct side effect is far increased security) + <braunr> kilobug: i don't see the scalability advantages though + <kilobug> braunr: I would say it goes in par with the modularity, like, you + can have a full-weight IPv4/IPv6 stack for desktop, but a minimal stack + for embeded + <braunr> i see + <braunr> for me, it's in par with extensibility :) + <braunr> i see modularity only as an implementation of extensibility + <braunr> or a special case of it + <braunr> Spyro: basically, it's supposed to bring the same advantages as + fuse, but even more so (because it's not limited to file systems), and + better (because it's normally well integrated with the core of the + system) + <teythoon> also, fuse is kind of bolted on and Linux composes really badly + <teythoon> e.g. it is not possible to nfs export a fuse mounted filesystem + on Linux + <braunr> bolted ? + <teythoon> isn't that the term? as in being attached using screws? + <braunr> i'm not familiar with it :p + <azeem> "a posteriori design" + <teythoon> yes + <braunr> ok |