Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
I would just like to infuriate the rabid anti-Microsoft visitors by pointing out that Windows NT's kernel is a hybrid of monolithic and microkernel architectures. The kernel itself exists in a protected state, with the Executive acting as intermediary. What would be kernel functions in a monolithic design are actually Executive functions in NT, which then interfaces with the actual kernel.

Luckily, this does not infuriate the rabid anti-Microsoft visitors anymore, since Microsoft itself did everything it could to undermine this good concept by introducing more and more mechanisms bypassing the kernel.

Quote: Original post by C-Junkie
HURD is pretty much a joke.

A release of Debian is available that runs on the Hurd. Although it is not considered suitable for production use, it does work, and a great many Debian packages have been ported to it.

Quote:
Apparently the linux kernel isn't good enough for the GNU people (no copyright assignment to the FSF, presumably), so they're (slowly, slowly, slowly) working on their own.

If you'd bothered to read up about it, you'd know that Hurd was started before the developers knew about Linux, and that if they had known about Linux, they wouldn't have bothered with Hurd.

Quote:
It's also a microkernel, which is architecturally different from a monolithic kernel. (like linux)

Well, no. The Hurd is a set of servers running on top of the GNU Mach microkernel.

Quote: Original post by Mayrel

Quote: Original post by C-Junkie
HURD is pretty much a joke.

A release of Debian is available that runs on the Hurd. Although it is not considered suitable for production use, it does work, and a great many Debian packages have been ported to it.

Which doesn't make it any less of a joke.

Quote:

Quote:
Apparently the linux kernel isn't good enough for the GNU people (no copyright assignment to the FSF, presumably), so they're (slowly, slowly, slowly) working on their own.

If you'd bothered to read up about it, you'd know that Hurd was started before the developers knew about Linux, and that if they had known about Linux, they wouldn't have bothered with Hurd.

And nobody has told the HURD people about linux in the last 13 years that linux has been better than HURD?

Quote:

Quote:
It's also a microkernel, which is architecturally different from a monolithic kernel. (like linux)

Well, no. The Hurd is a set of servers running on top of the GNU Mach microkernel.

...which makes it a microkernel architecture.

http://www.debian.org/ports/hurd/
Some people really need to watch movies like Revolution OS.. The story behind the HURD is that it was the last step in the GNU operating system, It was started about a year before linux was, but the debugging of the software took a great deal amount of time, because it was limited to members of the FSF. Linus started his kernel as a personal goal, and made the source code available to everyone and also accepted things from everyone. This relatively new form of developement caused the linux kernel to get to a working state much faster than HURD(to quote RMS "much faster than anyone thought possible").

I remember reading somewhere(wikipedia I think) that Amiga OS used a microkernel, and the result was of the fastest operating systems available as it passed memory pointers around rather than messages.

preEDIT:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel_%28computer_science%29
seems not to be wikipedia I remember reading, must be something else..

Quote: Original post by eedok
I remember reading somewhere(wikipedia I think) that Amiga OS used a microkernel, and the result was of the fastest operating systems available as it passed memory pointers around rather than messages.

Well it was fast, and it did use a microkernel
AmigaOS on wikipedia

Quote: Original post by fractoid
RMS sucks because he basically says that commercial programming (which is, let's face it, how most of us here on this board earn a living) is inherently morally wrong and that commercial programmers have 'sold out' their ethics.
He ignores the fact that while there is a limited place for projects funded purely by goodwill and donations, most programming is done for corporate clients.

He may well ignore that fact. Fortunately, it's not relevant. The fact that most programming is done for corporate clients does not, in fact, mean that programming for corporate clients morally acceptable.

In addition, RMS doesn't object to "commercial programming." He objects to "non-free software." He doesn't care if you get paid to write software. In fact, he's been paid to write (admittedly free) software, and he doesn't have a problem with that.

Quote:
Most of all he pisses me off because, reading between the lines of what I've heard from him, he believes that I have an obligation to give him (and the rest of the open source community) all source code I write.

Almost, but I have a minor correction: he believes that anyone who creates and distributes a piece of software has an obligation to provide the source with it.

Also, why don't you consider the fact that he gets pissed off at people who believe that they have a right to prohibit those to whom they distribute programs from modifying and redistributing them themselves.

Quote:
[clarification: the final 'Piss off' was not aimed at our illuminated GameDev audience. Rather, it was to all of the RMS-quote-spewing GPL weenies everywhere, especially the ones who used to regularly harass me about releasing all my source code because 'it was the right thing to do'.]

I'm a member of the GameDev audience, but I guess I'm not a member of the illuminated GameDev audience, since I believe that software should be free. Although I'm not an RMS-quote-spewing GPL weenie.

Quote: Original post by C-Junkie

Quote: Original post by Mayrel

Quote: Original post by C-Junkie
HURD is pretty much a joke.

A release of Debian is available that runs on the Hurd. Although it is not considered suitable for production use, it does work, and a great many Debian packages have been ported to it.

Which doesn't make it any less of a joke.

Then you'll have to explain what it is about the Hurd that makes it a joke. I would have thought that a kernel was a joke if it was unable to serve an operating system. Clearly, the Hurd can serve an operating system, both Debian and GNU itself.

Quote:

Quote:
If you'd bothered to read up about it, you'd know that Hurd was started before the developers knew about Linux, and that if they had known about Linux, they wouldn't have bothered with Hurd.

And nobody has told the HURD people about linux in the last 13 years that linux has been better than HURD?

That's a matter of opinion. Why haven't the various BSDs given up on their kernel and used Linux? It's because Linux isn't actually a very good example of software engineering.

The design of the Hurd is better than the design of Linux, although Linux supports a greater range of features and hardware, (almost) none of those are features or hardware that could not be supported by the Hurd at a later time, whilst the special features of the Hurd would be highly non-trivial to introduce to Linux. The special features of the Hurd allow it to be more scalable, more flexible, more extensible, and more secure than Linux, given an administrator who knows what he's doing.

It's spelt "Hurd", not "HURD".

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
It's also a microkernel, which is architecturally different from a monolithic kernel. (like linux)

Well, no. The Hurd is a set of servers running on top of the GNU Mach microkernel.

...which makes it a microkernel architecture.

Certainly it uses a microkernel architecture. But you said it was a microkernel, which it isn't. That was what I responding to.

Quote:
It's spelt "Hurd", not "HURD".

lets break this down to the bare letters and make a comparison
aitch, yoo, arr, dee
aitch, yoo, arr, dee
seem to be spelt the same to me..

Quote: Original post by eedok
I remember reading somewhere(wikipedia I think) that Amiga OS used a microkernel, and the result was of the fastest operating systems available as it passed memory pointers around rather than messages.

Which only was a viable option because the Amiga lacked memory protection.

Quote: Original post by Arild Fines
Which only was a viable option because the Amiga lacked memory protection.

Well it's not like the idea really have to be abandoned completly even with memory protection something similar could be used to ease the burden of sending really big packets on the stack.

Messages could simply be allocated in shared memory and then the pointer passed around.