Linked by Emmanuel Marty on Thu 2nd Sep 2004 07:36 UTC
As a programmer and manager of embedded software products for a living, I think that operating system programming is so much fun that it will eventually be outlawed. I've previously published two articles on OSNews, So, you want to write
an operating system and Climbing
the kernel mountain, and tried to summarize my experience in designing operating system kernels as well as technical traps that can be easily avoided.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
The author is mostly concerned with the financial/market-driven impact of deciding to write a kernel. Technologically, that's actually a pretty poor reason to compromise on a potential kernel design and go with Linux. Linux is a monolithic kernel. There have been voluminous debates over whether Linux should have embraced a micro-kernel design. I don't want to turn this thread into a debate between monolithic and micro-kernel design. That isn't my intention. But it is my intention to point out that there really isn't any one-size-fits-all kernel. Nor should there be. Also, it's more than a little arrogant to say that we have found nirvana in kernel design -- and we're sticking to it. Linux has its place. But it shouldn't be the only place.
Thinking evolves. Technology evolves. OSes evolve. Hardware evolves. Etc. I don't care how few kernel writers there are on this planet. Not long ago, it was somewhat of a joke to insist that a college student could write a serious operating system -- and we all know the result. Linux is not the ultimate evolution of the kernel. There will be others. I say great. Bring it on.