Re: GNUmach kernel parameters?
Is anyone going to answer Joachim's question?
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:15:07PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> 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
--
from
da Bobstopper
(Public Key available at http://bobturf.australispro.com.au/publickey.html)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: