Slashdot Mirror
Tanenbaum-Torvalds Microkernel Debate Continues
twasserman writes "Andy Tanenbaum's recent article in the May 2006 issue of IEEE Computer restarted the longstanding Slashdot discussion about microkernels. He has posted a message on his website that responds to the various comments, describes numerous microkernel operating systems, including Minix3, and addresses his goal of building highly reliable, self-healing operating systems."
and piss cocktaiL. obsessed - give we need to addrees it simple,
BIG DEAL. DEATH OF AMERICA) today, And the striki8g rival distribution, and enjoy all the Reasons why anyone then disaapeared reasons why anyone
It sounds to me that Andy Tanenbaum needs to write more code and less theory and than his micro-kernel will lift off the ground. However GNU/Linux would not be possible without a stable, reliable, fast, and free (speech & beer) kernel. This just shows all of you inspiring kids out there that what seems like a good theory on paper, is somewhat lack-luster when it comes to the actual execution. Maybe Andy should have given a little bit more of his time to his hobby and a little less time in writing books.
:)
There is nothing wrong with the microkernel nor the monolithic kernel, except:
1 - A microkernel requires a full fledged development team with all the beatiful red-tape and secret meetings that follow. Heil to the theif right?
2 - There is currently no viable microkernel alternative to the monolithic linux after 15 years of debate.
3 - There is & has been a debate over monolithic vs microkernel for 15 years? Where is minix today and where is linux? There is a debate about monolithic vs microkernel?
4 - Andy smells bad.
Sometimes what seems good in theory fails in practice, and id reather have a relic of a linux box than a stable, secure, and ultra-portable system like windows.
-- Cheers.
God, you're a fucking tool.