Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!decwrl!svc.portal.com!news1.best.com!blob.best.net!not-for-mail
From: dillon@best.com (Matt Dillon)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: The Future of FreeBSD...
Date: 24 Jul 1995 12:17:27 -0700
Organization: Best Internet Communications, Inc. (info@best.com)
Lines: 33
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3v0rk7$ac4@blob.best.net>
References: <3uktse$d9c@hal.nt.tuwien.ac.at> <3uo4fk$gjm@er6.rutgers.edu> <ck3xcVu00YUxABg5gY@andrew.cmu.edu> <3us0a8$l9m@er6.rutgers.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: blob.best.net
:In article <3us0a8$l9m@er6.rutgers.edu>,
:Ken Nakata <kenn@er6.rutgers.edu> wrote:
:>Matthew Jason White <mwhite+@CMU.EDU> writes:
:>>No, there have always been those who port each new version of a software
:>>to multiple systems. The fun thing about microkernels is that this
:>>becomes no longer necessary.
:>
:>Why and how is it so with microkernel and it is not with other OS's
:>such as NetBSD?
:>
:>Parhaps you don't know this; With NetBSD, we already have very
:>portable environment across many platforms. If I can compile one
:>program on i386 port, I'll be able to just re-compile the source on
From a theoretical perspective, nobody has really written a real
microkernel yet. So far, the microkernels (including Mach) appear to
be at least as complex as their monolithic brothers and require
about as much work to port across platforms. Just adding
a few more levels of subroutine call does not a microkernel make,
IMHO.
On the otherhand, I keep hearing people screaming about how inefficient
microkernels are. There is nothing in the inherent design that requires
a microkernel to be any less efficient then a monolithic design, it is
only the *current implementations* you see in the field which are
inefficient, which I attribute simply to bad design irregardless of
whether it is a microkernel or not.
I think the point is pretty much moot, myself. I see both monolithic
and microkernel designs heading for the same destination.
-Matt