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.TEWL1.H23@nmti.com> Sender: peter@nmti.com (peter da silva) Organization: Network/development platform support, NMTI References: <3uktse$d9c@hal.nt.tuwien.ac.at> <Ek3eKzC00ggL1EveAS@cs.cmu.edu> <3uouj0$gk@news.cloud9.net> <Ak42yOq00ggLBEvg1B@cs.cmu.edu> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 17:22:41 GMT Lines: 17 In article <Ak42yOq00ggLBEvg1B@cs.cmu.edu>, <Matthew.White@cs.cmu.edu> wrote: > They were experimenting, and one of the things they came up with > was the idea of a microkernel. They didn't "come up with" the idea. The microkernel has been widely used in real time operating systems for many years. Most real-time people consider that the Mach microkernel contains too many services to really count as one. Mach is more of a hybrid like RSX-11. Yes, an abstract interface is useful. BSD has lots of them laid out already. -- 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?"