summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/open_issues
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorThomas Schwinge <thomas@schwinge.name>2011-01-08 00:23:52 +0100
committerThomas Schwinge <thomas@schwinge.name>2011-01-08 00:23:52 +0100
commit4b997604921357720ac1d9304e27f83be8af6512 (patch)
tree3a37fa2f4708022bf4c5c4a43e553757818260b7 /open_issues
parent9d64538617425f795e33d711d8bd4f5d823de8e7 (diff)
open_issues/benefits_of_a_native_hurd_implementation: IRC, #hurd, 2010-12-28.
Diffstat (limited to 'open_issues')
-rw-r--r--open_issues/benefits_of_a_native_hurd_implementation.mdwn45
1 files changed, 45 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/open_issues/benefits_of_a_native_hurd_implementation.mdwn b/open_issues/benefits_of_a_native_hurd_implementation.mdwn
index 34e49e86..af96ce62 100644
--- a/open_issues/benefits_of_a_native_hurd_implementation.mdwn
+++ b/open_issues/benefits_of_a_native_hurd_implementation.mdwn
@@ -85,3 +85,48 @@ IRC, #hurd, August / September 2010
<marcusb> ArneBab: as a side note, although people keep complaining, the
linux kernel seems to be growing steadily, so getting stuff into the
kernel doesn't seem too hard. 8-O
+
+---
+
+IRC, #hurd, 2010-12-28
+
+ <tim> but is monolithic so bad?
+ <sartakov> yep
+ <braunr> no it's not
+ <braunr> proof: it works very well for most people
+ [...]
+ <braunr> the real problem is extensibility and interfaces
+ <tim> :/ whats the huge advantage of micro-k
+ <braunr> extensibility
+ <tim> over?
+ <braunr> you can add a whole lot of new services for new purposes with new
+ interfaces without changing the kernel
+ <tim> oright
+ <braunr> it basically boils down to the original Unix idea: everything does
+ one thing well
+ [...]
+ <kilobug> well, I would say extensibility and fault-tolerance are the two
+ key advantages
+ <braunr> taht's a side effect
+ <braunr> there are fault taulerant monolithic kernels
+ [...]
+ <braunr> tolerant*
+ <braunr> and the hurd is for now a non fault-tolerant microkernel based OS
+ :/
+ [...]
+ <kilobug> braunr: not really; you can't ensure fault tolerance for code
+ running in kernel space, code running in kernel space can do everything,
+ including reboot, crash, ...
+ [...]
+ <braunr> kilobug: right, a monolithick kernel is less folt-tolerant than a
+ well designed/implemented microkernel based os
+ <kilobug> braunr: well, the Hurd is buggy nowadays, but things like an
+ ext2fs translator doing a segfault and being restarted is a
+ fault-tolerance that would be almost impossible to have in Linux
+ <kilobug> braunr: sure, you can have fault-tolerance with FUSE, but FUSE is
+ applying micro-kernel paradigm to Linux
+ [...]
+ <braunr> the reason i don't care that much about fault tolerance is that
+ Linux obviously shows a monolithic kernel can run almost flawlessly if
+ well written
+ <braunr> but extensibility is really another matter