Tanenbaum-Torvalds Microkernel Debate Continues 534
twasserman writes "Andy Tanenbaum's recent article in the May 2006 issue of IEEE Computer restarted the longstanding Slashdot discussion about microkernels. He has posted a message on his website that responds to the various comments, describes numerous microkernel operating systems, including Minix3, and addresses his goal of building highly reliable, self-healing operating systems."
Grandma's computer never crashes (Score:4, Funny)
Tanenbaum wrote (in TFA):The average user does not care about even more features or squeezing the last drop of performance out of the hardware, but cares a lot about having the computer work flawlessly 100% of the time and never crashing. Ask your grandma.
Interesting. My mom recently bought a computer for my grandma. Grandma doesn't have a problem with the computer crashing at all. Her secret? She never turns it on.
Minix is already on version 3 (Score:5, Funny)
And Linux seems to be stuck on version 2.6
And v3.12 (I think, I'm going from memory here) will finally support the X windowing system
Oh...maybe I should have left out that last sentence...kinda kills my argument
Re:To Interject for a moment (Score:4, Funny)
Damn right, this'll be better than the less filling/tastes great argument.
Re:To Interject for a moment (Score:5, Funny)
Wait a minute, too much information here...
Re:Celebrity death-coding (Score:3, Funny)
hey eveybody (Score:5, Funny)
I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and
professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones. This has been brewing
since april, and is starting to get ready. I'd like any feedback on
things people like/dislike in minix, as my OS resembles it somewhat
(same physical layout of the file-system (due to practical reasons)
among other things).
I've currently ported bash and gcc, and things seem to work.
This implies that I'll get something practical within a few months, and
I'd like to know what features most people would want. Any suggestions
are welcome, but I won't promise I'll implement them
Obligatory Igno Molnar quote (Score:4, Funny)
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9906 .0/0746.html [iu.edu]
He is, of course, referring to all the research in the '80s and '90s on microkernels and IPC-based operating systems.
Re:Whatever... (Score:4, Funny)
Oh Tanenbaum, oh Tanenbaum, wie grün sind ... (Score:3, Funny)
Du grünst nicht nur zur Sommerszeit, nein auch im Winter, wenn es schneit.
Oh Tanenbaum, oh Tanenbaum, wie grün sind deine Blätter
For the uninformed: Tannenbaum (with double n) is the german word for Fir (conifer) or the synonym for Christmas-Tree. The verse above is the first of a famous german christmas-carol.
Re:OOP (Score:4, Funny)
Pizza
What I'd Like To See (Score:4, Funny)
I'd like to see Linus say "I've done a monolithic kernel and proven its success. Now I'm going to build a performant microkernel and see what all the fuss is about." He could hand over Linux kernel development to the senior crew that's already taking care of the major modules, and try something else.
Essentially, it would be cool for someone like Linus, with his incredibly strong practical engineering bent, to do again what he did with Linux: semi-clean-sheet a new kernel that meets his performance requirements, but is designed around different strategies for achieving what every OS tries to achieve.
I bet that, in two or three years, he would recant his earlier dismissal of microkernels and say that there's actually some interesting stuff there, and along the way solve some of the perennial complaints that slashdotters always bring up whenever microkernels are mentioned. In his heart of hearts, I'm sure Linus has some legacy issues with the current kernel design that he'd love to jettison, but can't without massively re-organizing the existing architecture, in which too many interested parties are already involved.
And he could put Stallman and the HURD boys to shame *again*, which is a twofer