It looks like Debian/Hurd team is working actively to port Linux-like OS to Mach, but I was just wondering if there's a good documentation with a list of programs that are fully utilizing the new features of microkernel. It looks like there are clearer advantages in the area of security, encapsulation, portability and flexibility through use of ports/translators. But I'm now wondering the following:
1. Is there anything that is closer to the user-level that would clearly separate microkernel based OS (i.e. Hurd) from monolithic ones (i.e. Linux)? From user p.o.v., it's rather hard to come up with clear advantages of switching to it at this point--that is putting aside the fact that it's still under development stage. If translators are fully exploited (i.e. use of XSLT, implementation of DocBook standards, etc.) that may be a different story. And I may be talking over my head if I'm overestimating the scope of translators. 2. Intuitively, one can tell that having an extra layer below an OS creates an overhead to the performance. (I know last sentence may charge some people with emotions, but I'm only speaking generically with the general theoretical difference between monolithic kernel and microkernel in mind.) Is there a work under way to create microkernel-based processor at the hardware level? Or has the processors evolved in such way it already gives monolithic ones the type of performance advantage that microkernel may seem to enjoy? 4. Continuing from my question #1, is there any active development under way to implement XSLT-type of programs as translators? Good day, -- The loneliest person on earth is the person who doesn't acknowledge that he's made out of clay. - Sang-eon Shin Michael ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) _______________________________________________ Help-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-hurd
