[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: If QNX is successful, why NOT GNU Microkernels

From: Alfred M. Szmidt
Subject: Re: If QNX is successful, why NOT GNU Microkernels
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 12:39:46 +0100 (MET)

    QNX is able to be a successful MicroKernel, but why NOT GNUMach /
    OSKITMach / L4Mach ? So, what could be the problem with GNU
    Microkernels ? QNX is using GNU tools and they are
    successful. Where we are lacking ? coding style / documentation /
    info on creating a MicroKernel ? QNX don't have partition
    limitation like we have with ext2. Even device driver is also
    implemented without any problem...

QNX is non-free, so it is not successful in our eyes.  You also
confuse Mach with the Hurd, GNU Mach does not have such limits, it is
the Hurd that has the >2GB limit.  User-space device drivers haven't
been implemented because nobody has implemented them, this is all a
volunteer project, we work in our spare time and pick what we find


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]