To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Sharing ideas is always good! In that case only kudos to writing a 7 page article without intention of actually participating in the actual 'contest'. On those terms, I feel obliged to give some more constructive feedback to it.
For starters, the following two quotes are very contradictive;
"leading to a powerful *snip* microkernel based OS"
"the microkernel translates every event into a message"
Ouch! Microkernels' *main* (and when going exo~ it's basically it's *only*) task is doing the IPC. And you guys give that even more overhead? It really gets me thinking about the performance of this OS. How did you tackle this?
Second; Your discussion about the set-manager rings a bell. How much is your OS based on L4? If I recall correctly, they have a similar concept.
Third; A basic idea of a microkernel is 'if something goes down, reboot just that'. How do you deal with such situations? This is even more relevant (and interesting) when you take the network-distributed part in mind. Some info about that would be really nice.
Lastly; the main objective was to build an educational OS. But the article discusses things like network-distributed file-descriptor encryption. Besides the obvious 'what algorithm and how easy will it be to crack', isn't that a little far-fetched for an educational OS?






Member since:
2005-04-01
This entry is not elligible to win unless they produce either the source OR an available binary (it can even be commercial). It simply has to be available in some way, shape, or form to qualify.