On 3/29/06, Ronald G Minnich <rminnich@lanl.gov> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > mach was developed at cmu and freely available, wasn't it? the documentation > > was (tree killers). > > > best Mach phrase: "micro kernel doesn't mean it is small, just that it > does not do much". > > from a flame war that erupted when the leviathan mach 3.0 came out. > > Well, it may have been big, but at least it was slow. > > Lots of good research came out of mach ... not what you think. sandia > national labs has done lots of great OS work for 10 years, or so, > spurred on by the unusable Mach-derived OSF-1/MK-AD that came on their > paragon, and the need to toss it and start clean. SNL did some very nice > work, all due to the need to get rid of the "micro kernel". >
In case anyone was interested. The madmen at UNSW are porting Darwin (the mac os x unix portion that used to be freely available until the intel macs came out) to L4 http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au/software/darbat/ I know Qualcomm also uses L4 in real production hardware now for embedded systems. You can't lump all microkernels together. Mach was/is a really poor microkernel compared to others of today's standards. QNX has a much better one as well. Dave > ron >
