From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Dec 17 9:12:25 2000 From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 17 09:12:23 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from ifour.com.br (unknown [200.236.148.68]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1CC3637B400 for ; Sun, 17 Dec 2000 09:12:19 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 40796 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2000 14:20:08 -0000 Received: from port40.tdnet.com.br (HELO ifour.com.br) (200.236.148.140) by midas.ifour.com.br with SMTP; 17 Dec 2000 14:20:08 -0000 Sender: grios@FreeBSD.ORG Message-ID: <3A3CD785.A4F5E644@ifour.com.br> Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 15:11:01 +0000 From: Gustavo Vieira Goncalves Coelho Rios X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jordan Hubbard Cc: Andrew Reilly , Patryk Zadarnowski , Tony Finch , SteveB , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kernel type References: <6134.977051878@winston.osd.bsdi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > > Yeah, but in what sense is that use of Mach a serious > > microkernel, if it's only got one server: BSD? I've never > > understood the point of that sort of use. It makes sense for a > > QNX or GNU/Hurd or minix or Amoeba style of architecture, but > > how does Mach help Apple, instead of using the bottom half of > > BSD as well as the top half? > > That's actually a much better question and one I can't really answer. > > One theory might be that the NeXT people were simply Microkernel > bigots for no particularly well-justified reason and that is simply > that. Another theory might be that they were able to deal with the > machine-dependent parts of Mach far more easily given its > comparatively minimalist design and given their pre-existing expertise > with it. Another theory, sort of related to the previous one, is that > Apple has some sort of plans for the future which they're not > currently sharing where Mach plays some unique role. > > - Jordan > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message I tried QNX! If microkernel is low performance, why QNX is so fast? It makes no sense to me! Is there any choice on QNX beats a freebsd server in , say, http server ? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message