isnt linux a micro-kernel? i would think so! if we can config it to be a
cool 400k in size with loadabel modules?
regards
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Stefan Monnier"
<monnier+lists/linux/kernel/news/@tequila.cs.yale.edu>
To: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
Subject: Re: is Linux obsolete?
>>>>> "David" == David Leal <lorien@esoterica.pt> trolled:
> developed today are microkernel based, e. g. Windows NT, GNU HURD,
BeOS...
Nitpick: WinNT is *not* based on a microkernel.
> Looking at this, and realizing that Linux IS based on a system which is
> 30 years old I ask the following question: How viable is Linux? Are we
> (well, I mean you, because, as much as I would like, I haven't
contributed
> anything to the kernel yet) going in the right directions?
Does anybody care ?
Stefan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/