[openbeos] Re: Kernel status (POSIX)
- From: "Manuel Jesus Petit de Gabriel" <freston@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:53:31 -0800
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nathan Whitehorn" <nathan.whitehorn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 4:53 PM
Subject: [openbeos] Re: Kernel status (POSIX)
>
> > What is the status of the kernel=3F
> > I am the 'POSIX' guy (I guess), so I am wondering
> > about kernel and file system status.
>
> In regard to kernel design, I would propose that we adopt an MS-Mach
> (multiserver, not Microsoft) like approach, albeit with kernel space
> "servers" as kernel addons. Thus, we could have an fs module that
> handles file desrciptors, etc, a posix module, etc., etc., etc. This
> would accomplish two things:
>
> 1. Prevent forking the NewOS kernel. Travis has said that he opposes
> the intodruction of posix to his kernel. So we don't, we add it as a
> kernel module.
i) unless you get Travis to buy the Mach model you'll have to fork.
ii) stating that Travis opposes to introduction of posix in his kernel
is a mis-representation: as I perceive it, it would be better
worded as "building the next posix clone is not his driving force".
Some stuff will be there, some other will not.
manuel,
>
> 2. It vastly increases the future flexibility of the kernel.
> -Nathan
>
> --
> Fortune Cookie Says:
>
> Accordion, n.:
> A bagpipe with pleats.
>
Other related posts:
