diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'faq/which_microkernel/discussion.mdwn')
| -rw-r--r-- | faq/which_microkernel/discussion.mdwn | 32 |
1 files changed, 29 insertions, 3 deletions
diff --git a/faq/which_microkernel/discussion.mdwn b/faq/which_microkernel/discussion.mdwn index 7ea131e9..ffdc6720 100644 --- a/faq/which_microkernel/discussion.mdwn +++ b/faq/which_microkernel/discussion.mdwn @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2011, 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] [[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this @@ -50,13 +50,15 @@ All in all, I still think my text was better. If you have any conerns with it, please discuss them... -# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-09-27 +# seL4 + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-09-27 <cjuner> Does anyone remember/know if/why not seL4 was considered for hurd-l4? Is anyone aware of any differences between seL4 and coyotos? -## 2011-09-28 +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-09-29 <antrik> cjuner: the seL4 project was only at the beginning when the decision was made. so was Coyotos, but Shapiro promised back then that @@ -92,3 +94,27 @@ please discuss them... matters to take away anything useful from more detail ;-) ) <antrik> I could try to explain the issues I mentioned for Coyotos (as far as I understand them), but would that really help you? + + +# Xnu (Darwin) + + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-03-30 + + <mel__> did people consider to port Hurd to Darwin? i.e. replace GNU Mach + with Darwin? + <braunr> no + <braunr> well, quickly only + <mel__> wouldn't it be a reasonable idea? + <mel__> after all, Darwin is production-ready and contains a Mach side. + <braunr> not more than fixing gnumach itself, or using linux instead + <mel__> well. + <braunr> those implementations have diverged with time + <mel__> i see + <mel__> the fsf should pay people for fixing gnu mach then. :) + <antrik> mel__: indeed someone consided Xnu (the actual kernel of Darwin) a + while back; but I think he shelved the idea again. not sure about the + exact reasons + <antrik> Xnu implements a few improvements that might be helpful; but it + doesn't address the really fundamental issues that matter for a true + multiserver system... |