Re: Some Hurd and Mach programming questions
From: Tomasz Wegrzanowski <maniek@beer.com>
Subject: Re: Some Hurd and Mach programming questions
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 18:37:04 +0200
> How much of IPCing really needs MIG and
> couldn't be done by some set cpp macros or other way that
> don't need inventing a new language (.defs) ?
It is often easier and simpler to use an IDL rather than to write
odd macros, and an IDL has an opportunity to optimize actual
code. Anyway, MiG is very simple, so you have no difficulty to learn
it.
> Is using MIG any more portable ?
MiG itself is actually independent of Mach. See an arbitrary .defs,
if you doubt. Of course, some (or most) of data types are dependent on
Mach, though.
> Runing on top of Linux microkernel you have *all* device drivers,
> KGI for free, probably all net protocols and similar goodies
> ( depend on way of micro-kernelizing Linux )
> and quite good performance to start with.
I think you should realize the fact that it is not good at all to
convert a monolithic kernel into a microkernel, by looking at the
history of Mach. If you just want the device drivers, it would be much
easier to port them to Mach (or OSKit).
Okuji
Reply to: