Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 11th May 2006 19:19 UTC, submitted by Christopher Nelson
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."
Thread beginning with comment 123782
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-02-15
which is built, like Brevix, on RPC
Brevix was definitely not based on RPC. And no, 'at the core', Brevix was not a 'privleged piece of code'.
Brevix is entirely agnostic about which parts of the system live on which side of the user/supervisor boundary , except that those parts that the hardware demand live on the supervisor side because they have to execute priviliged instructions.