Linked by Hadrien Grasland on Fri 28th Jan 2011 20:37 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes It's recently been a year since I started working on my pet OS project, and I often end up looking backwards at what I have done, wondering what made things difficult in the beginning. One of my conclusions is that while there's a lot of documentation on OS development from a technical point of view, more should be written about the project management aspect of it. Namely, how to go from a blurry "I want to code an OS" vision to either a precise vision of what you want to achieve, or the decision to stop following this path before you hit a wall. This article series aims at putting those interested in hobby OS development on the right track, while keeping this aspect of things in mind.
Thread beginning with comment 460084
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Linux
by Alfman on Fri 28th Jan 2011 22:37 UTC in reply to "Linux"
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

Absolutely.
Look at the plan9 project, where they fixed many of the technical issues with Linux interfaces.

Do they have a good reason to write a better OS?
Yes.

Does anybody care about plan9?
No.

Given that nobody cares, was the effort justified?
Maybe. It's nice to fix a broken interface. In the end though, those of us who have to deal with the outside world will still have to deal with the broken interfaces despite the fact that something better exists.

Building an OS is a noble person goal, but it should not be undertaken under the impression that it will change the world. The market is too saturated to care.

BTW. Building a malloc implementation is really not that difficult. I've built one which significantly outperforms GNU's malloc in MT processes by using lock free primitives.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Linux
by tylerdurden on Sat 29th Jan 2011 00:56 in reply to "RE: Linux"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Absolutely.
Look at the plan9 project, where they fixed many of the technical issues with Linux interfaces.


Huh? Are you sure you were looking at Plan 9?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Linux
by renox on Sat 29th Jan 2011 13:12 in reply to "RE[2]: Linux"
renox Member since:
2005-07-06

Well first the GP made the classic Linux/Unix mistake: Plan9 started in the 80s whereas Linux started in 1991.

But you made the mistake of thinking that interfaces are only GUI which isn't the case, so he wasn't incorrect here..

Reply Parent Score: 1