Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 11th May 2006 19:19 UTC, submitted by Christopher Nelson
OSNews, Generic OSes The microkernel vs. monolithic debate, whether you boys and girls like it or not, rages on. After Tanenbaum's article and an email from Torvalds, another kernel developer steps up, this time in favour of the muK. A developer of the muK-based Coyotos writes: "Ultimately, there are two compelling reasons to consider microkernels in high-robustness or high-security environments: there are several examples of microkernel-based systems that have succeeded in these applications because of the system structuring that microkernel-based designs demand, [and] there are zero examples of high-robustness or high-security monolithic systems."
Permalink for comment 123801
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Debunking Linus's Latest
by sathishmls on Fri 12th May 2006 07:08 UTC
sathishmls
Member since:
2005-11-13

any crash of a device driver will even make a microkernel OS useless.

this is absolutely FALSE !!!

in a microkernel, if there is a bug in a device driver
1) and if that device is used in the current work then there is a chance that restarting might makes everything usable while a monolithic kernel will be down without any chances.
2) and if that device is not used in the current work then the current work is 100% not affected by the bug in that driver and the kernel will try to restart the driver while a monolithic kernel will be down even that device is not used without any chances.

in both situations microkernel BEATS the monolithic kernel.

for ex, if a floppy driver has a bug, it will bring the whole linux down. while if its a microkernel the system is perfectly usable while the floppy driver will get automatically restarted.even after getting restarted still it causes problem, it wont affect the current normal work or the kernel until the floppy is used at that time. there Microkernel Stands !!!

NASA even uses Windows which Linux guys argues as not secure ??? so NASA using Linux doesnt make that linux is highly reliable and secure.the only thing is because linux is free from license problems because of GPL and POPULAR.

everyone start developing on a microkernel whether it may be MINIX or L4.sec or Coyotos.

A microkernel can be successfully only if it has huge developers like linux. if all the linux developers turn to microkernel side then everyone will realise the power of a Microkernel OS.

BS. Again, it is impossible to prove that your code is correct (don't have bugs).
When your code is so small that you can show empirically that it is safe, that means you still have to call it through a function, and there can lie lots of bugs (concurrency and the like).


The calling function will be running in a user space.so bugs in the calling function wont affect the kernel.

Yes, you have to be a good, provable correct algorithm before making it fast. You just forgot the part about "making it fast".
Depending only on the hardware to be faster means that your kernel will stay in a niche at best, and can never compare to Linux


i am not saying that only the hardware controls the speed. i just said that performance reduce due to the microkernel approach since its safer, is not that much important in these days or the following days.

Incorrect. BSD were there and free already. People were waiting fir a free OS that commercial entities could not steal from them instead. Because stealing the kernel would mean also stealing their work. So I strongly believe that yes, the GPL license made a big push, but the fact that the kernel was monolithic too.

BSD was available. but the source code of BSD was having a case suit filed by AT&T.
everything is because of GPL is known by everyone. since GNU/Linux was a complete free OS which had the complete GNU utilities and since it was usable is the only reason everyone started to add codes. the monolithic kernel approach has made good programmers lazy and made them to change from HURD to Linux kernel.i can say that a test version of GNU/HURD was not released before a test version of GNU/Linux was released.

I disagree, just look at the HURD. It does not attract the load of people you talk about. Even though it's GPL too.

HURD was GPL too, but at that time it was developed by a small group. Peoples code other than that small group were not allowed to get add in the HURD project due to the finalization of design of kernel.

Insulting great minds like those working on the Linux kernel (among which A. Cox) do not make me in your camp.
You sound like Linux is developed by no great people.


i accept that they are good programmers. Linus made them lazy by starting a fun monolithic kernel.
this is clearly proved because linus itself told in his first newsgroup message about the release of linux that the next year HURD will be ready. until that everyone can play with my kernel.he never planned to create a very good futuristic kernel.he just created a easy playable kernel and due to GPL and everyone are allowed to add codes to Linux kernel and not like HURD at that time which didnt allow anyone to add codes to the main project, everyone added codes to the linux kernel. since its slowly gained popular , Linus CUNNINGLY changed his voice and he saw many programmers turned their faces to easy monolithic kernel. he then started to act like as if he designed the linux kernel to be highly reliable.

BS. Nothing guarantees that an OS or kernel is 100 % perfection, portable and secured. You live in a dream world.
And management from Linus was very important to make Linux what it is now. Tanenbaum would have bowed when IBM and others wanted to put their things in the Linux kernel, or would have bowed before proprietary drivers. I say this because of how he licensed Minix


all linus wants now is that no programmers should turn to microkernel side as he fears that microkernel might change the future and it will.

BS. RMS has the HURD, and it has already been redesigned at least once. You talk like all this is possible like that. You're dreaming, wake up !

nowadays system programmers and researchers have become very less. thats the big problem. all good programmers please turn to microkernel side and start growing your creativity.

Reply Score: 3