[nycbug-talk] kernels

[Pete Wright]

mlists at bizintegrators.com wrote:

>On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 08:48:26PM -0500, Pete Wright wrote:
>  
>
>>boy i wish i was at the bug and not doing a night shift :(  here is an 
>>interesting link regarding monolithic kernels relating to OpenBSD:
>>
>>http://kerneltrap.org/comment/reply/3239
>>
>>i pretty much agree with alot of the issues raised, but in my industry i 
>>need fully funtional 3D drivers provided by nvidia for linux.  yea it 
>>sucks that they are not GPL'd, but hey it's better than using NT for 
>>Maya....
>>
>>    
>>
>
>They seem to have missed one important post on the list.
>Here it is, from Kamo Hiroyasu <wd at ics.nara-wu.ac.jp>
>"
>Chuck, you are misusing the term `monolithic'.  A monolithic kernel
>with loadable modules is still a monolithic kernel because the loaded
>codes will run on the kernel space.  It is far from a micro kernel.
>That implies: you cannot gain any advantage of mocro kernels from
>loadable modules.
>
>Please consult any textbook on operating systems for detail.
>
>                Kamo Hiroyasu
>                [Kamo is the family name and Hiroyasu the given name.]
>
>"
>
>Therefore, Linux kernel is also monolithic.
>  
>
good point, hence the whole tanenbaum/torvalds split....
-p


>I'm very gratefull for OpenBSD's integrity, meaning things like binary
>only drivers will never be accepted.
>
>-bruno
>_______________________________________________
>talk mailing list
>talk at lists.nycbug.org
>http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
>  
>


-- 
~~~oO00Oo~~~
Pete Wright
email:  pete at nomadlogic.org
mobile: 917.415.9866
web:    www.nomadlogic.org/~pete