Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th May 2006 21:25 UTC, submitted by luzr
OSNews, Generic OSes Torvalds has indeed chimed in on the micro vs. monolithic kernel debate. Going all 1992, he says: "The whole 'microkernels are simpler' argument is just bull, and it is clearly shown to be bull by the fact that whenever you compare the speed of development of a microkernel and a traditional kernel, the traditional kernel wins. The whole argument that microkernels are somehow 'more secure' or 'more stable' is also total crap. The fact that each individual piece is simple and secure does not make the aggregate either simple or secure. And the argument that you can 'just reload' a failed service and not take the whole system down is equally flawed." My take: While I am not qualified to reply to Linus, there is one thing I want to say: just because it is difficult to program, does not make it the worse design.
Thread beginning with comment 122931
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Agreed
by kaiwai on Wed 10th May 2006 04:45 UTC in reply to "Agreed"
Member since:

I fully agree with Linus - it's like you'd take ej: a gnome app (evolution) and instead of taking all the libraries and putting everything in a single adress space to run it, you'd run a "gtk server", a "glib server", a "fontconfig server", a "libpng server"'s the same concept but applied to userspace (and if userspace continues increasing the complexity some people suffering from microkernelitis will advocate this model for userspace)

I disagree. Yes, it is stupid just to have things modularised for he sake of modularisation, but if one were to seperate Evolution into the front and back ends, the back end datastore can be used in other applications, in terms of retrieving information etc.

Having seperate 'daemons' for taking care of things is ok, but it starts to become stupid when it gets to the point that something is done a certain way, not because it'll yield better performance or reliability (or both), but "well, I've done the rest of the system like that.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Agreed
by RenatoRam on Wed 10th May 2006 06:56 in reply to "RE: Agreed"
RenatoRam Member since:

Just to let you know, it is already like that. Evolution is the frontend, and eds (Evolution Data Store) is the backend.

You can interact with eds with different fontends (such as the clock/calendar applet of the gnome panel, the lightweight Dates and Contacts apps, and all the "addressbook aware" apps that are around).

Besides, there exist a "gtk server" project, that creates the guis on the fly based on client requests. It's not much used, though.

Reply Parent Score: 1