Hi,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 10:08:35AM -0400, Barry deFreese wrote:
> I suppose that depends on who you ask. Some of the bigwigs are
> looking at a totally new system based on Coyotos.
Minor nitpick: My latest impression was that Marcus doesn't have any
preference for Coyotos anymore; the new L
Scribit Barry deFreese dies 22/03/2007 hora 10:08:
> (Though from what I understand, some of the new derivatives of L4
> might be more compatible).
Yes, both Coyotos and L4.sec would provide the needed features, IIUC.
The thing is, Coyotos is developed more openly with some hard deadlines,
wheras
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 10:00:29PM +0100, Richard Braun wrote:
Mach is old [...]
[...]
Hurd on L4 project is stalled [...]
Sooo... what's the plan? Stay with Mach and feed that old stuff?
Leslie
I suppose that depends on who you ask. Some of the bigw
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 10:00:29PM +0100, Richard Braun wrote:
> Mach is old [...]
>
> [...]
>
> Hurd on L4 project is stalled [...]
Sooo... what's the plan? Stay with Mach and feed that old stuff?
Leslie
--
NEW homepage: https://viridian.dnsalias.net/~sky/homepage/
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 08:54:24PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 09:01:35PM +0200, Constantine Kousoulos wrote:
>
> > Your observation is correct. All of Mach's drivers currently reside
> > inside the kernel. AFAIK, Mach's IPC is too slow to support user
> > space drive
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 09:01:35PM +0200, Constantine Kousoulos wrote:
> Your observation is correct. All of Mach's drivers currently reside
> inside the kernel. AFAIK, Mach's IPC is too slow to support user
> space drivers.
Phew. Don't they have that in Minix? I think I remember starting the
R
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Hello Leslie
when I went to the task page with notes on the coming sound system, I
noticed that it's written there that device drivers go into Mach.
Why is that? I thought a big point of micro kernels was that a single
malfunctioning driver couldn't affe
