Subject: Re: microkernels
To: Gary Thorpe <>
From: Ian Zagorskih <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 07/03/2003 02:46:58
On Wednesday 02 July 2003 19:17, Gary Thorpe wrote:
> >
> > Before NetBSD i worked alot with microkernel OS QNX4 and i cannot say
> > it's
> > supperior or not. Just another ideology. Every architecture has it's
> > own
> > benefits and weak sides.
> Yes, but some architectures are better than others, despite all having
> benefits and weaknesses (of course everyone has differing opinions on
> which ones are better). Would you like to replace your modern
> multitasking OS with CP/M or DOS 3.3 - after all everything has
> strengths and weaknesses? It depends on what you want to do with the
> OS. So what are microkernels well suited for as compared to monolithic
> systems? In what cases would you opt for one over the other?

Ohh well, this is a long topic and i'm really not so long in BSD world, l=
then two months. After five or six years in embedded design for QNX4.x. A=
this is 2:38 of night atm here so i'm a bit tired to type a long objectiv=
letter :)

But this topic is quite interesting [IMO] and i found something good=20
developing embedded stuff for NetBSD now same as i lost some good QNX=20
specific features i used to use in the past. So if you want i can at leas=
try to write a bit later some esse a'la "From system developer's point of=
view: moving from true network distributed micro kernel OS QNX4 to solid=20
kernel OS NetBSD".

JSC Novosibirsk Geophysical Equipment Development Center.