On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 03:59:32PM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote: > As much as I appreciate some aspects of the Hurd's design, I must say I > never really saw the point of having a microkernel if it doesn't allow > you to implement drivers as services. Mach allows you to implement user-space drivers AFAIK. This no limitation in the Hurd, we can do it. Our current drivers are just a big hack at the moment. > Today's hardware is so much of a moving target, that having drivers in > separate processes would be a huge boon, especially considering the fact > how much easier it would be for those untrusted 3rd parties (hardware > manufacturers ;-) to write and debug drivers if they are just standard > process using the standard user mode API. I agree, on L4 we must implement drivers in user-space, but that will probably just a hack of the Linux drivers until we get enough people to write native drivers. This is certainly something we want and will likely be created in the future. > The only popular OS I know that gets this right is QNX, but sadly it's > proprietary as hell. I'm sure we can do better. Jeroen Dekkers -- Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org IRC: jeroen@openprojects
Attachment:
pgpTgMEHWsuOW.pgp
Description: PGP signature