Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!daffy!uwvax!uwm.edu!news.moneng.mei.com!news.ecn.bgu.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news.uh.edu!uuneo.neosoft.com!nmtigw!peter From: peter@nmti.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: The Future of FreeBSD... Message-ID: <id.DEWL1.DU2@nmti.com> Sender: peter@nmti.com (peter da silva) Organization: Network/development platform support, NMTI References: <3uktse$d9c@hal.nt.tuwien.ac.at> <Ek3eKzC00ggL1EveAS@cs.cmu.edu> <3uo4fk$gjm@er6.rutgers.edu> <ck3xcVu00YUxABg5gY@andrew.cmu.edu> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 17:06:25 GMT Lines: 30 In article <ck3xcVu00YUxABg5gY@andrew.cmu.edu>, Matthew Jason White <mwhite+@CMU.EDU> wrote: > Excerpts from netnews.comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc: 21-Jul-95 Re: The > Future of FreeBSD... by Ken Nakata@er6.rutgers.e > > Take a look at NetBSD source tree. What you're saying isn't intrinsic > > to microkernel architecture. > No, there have always been those who port each new version of a software > to multiple systems. The fun thing about microkernels is that this > becomes no longer necessary. Nonsense. This is like the object oriented programming people claiming that with OO languages you don't have to spend effort abstracting interfaces. Interface abstraction can, but does not always, benefit from object oriented languages. Portability can, but does not always, benefit from microkernel design. You can also get portability from a layered interface abstraction within a single protection domain. Like BSD uses. -- Peter da Silva (NIC: PJD2) `-_-' Network Management Technology Incorporated 'U` 1601 Industrial Blvd. Sugar Land, TX 77478 USA +1 713 274 5180 "Har du kramat din varg idag?"