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 460090
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Good Article, One note:
by Lennie on Fri 28th Jan 2011 23:45 UTC in reply to "Good Article, One note:"
Member since:

It sounds more like it meant to say: _you_ will not come up with anything better. Because it has already had so many people look at it and from just reading the code it will not be clear why thing are the way they are.

Although it can definitely use improvement on the interactive side. People have been doing a lot of work on that lately though.

I just wish a distribution will come out 'soon' with 2.6.39 when it is ready I've seen so many good changelog entries from 2.6.37 and 2.6.38 and promisses for 2.6.39.

Because I think Linux has a lot of potential as a desktop and I keep hoping it will deliver what people want. It seems to be improving every time, but progress feels slow.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:

I don't really understand your comment. The book one the 2.4 version of the linux kernel had some stern language warning the user to not try to improve the scheduler. Obviously, its been improved. I wish I would have ignored it and spent more time trying to understand schedulers.

Reply Parent Score: 2

bertzzie Member since:

I think it's written like that because many people try to suggest a "new and improved" scheduler too much. And because of that, the kernel devs (the book I read is from one of the the kernel dev) got tired and just write something like that ;)

Edited 2011-01-29 03:01 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

tylerdurden Member since:

Yeah, the scheduler has been improved. However, it has not been improved by people who were having a first go at understanding the internals of an Operating System.

You have to learn how to walk before you can think about running a marathon.

Reply Parent Score: 2