riscy
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Operating system

To: broadley@neurocog.lrdc.pitt.edu
Subject: Re: Operating system
From: Pat Mackinlay <SMACKINLA@cc.curtin.edu.au>
Date: 29 Jun 1993 22:14:06 +0800
Cc: riscy@pyramid.com
>Just though we should keep it in mind.  (I think mach would handle MIPS cpu+
>mips video real well 8-) )

The system is certainly capable, but there are still a few obstacles to 
getting Mach running. The major one is the fact that Mach kernel 
development is still very much tied to CMU. The source is made available, 
but there's a fairly long wait between releases and I doesn't compare well 
to the speed of Linux development. I'm not knocking Mach, but I really
think Linux is a better option at this stage... We can take another look 
once the hardware's here I guess <grin>.

>Linux of course is 100% free but probably the least portable (it pains
>me to say).

At least it's fairly small. The Mach source is pretty big, and there is 
lots of message passing semantics to learn if you really want to understand 
it all. Not only that, but then you've got to understand (and debug) the 
servers you're trying to run. Really, I think Linux would be an 
easier/quicker port... (sound strange, doesn't it <grin>).

Pat -- "There's only one thing left to do Mama, I got to ding a ding dang
        my dang a long ling long" (Jesus Built My Hotrod -- Ministry)
GCS d* -p+ c++ l++ m--- s+/- !g w- t- r

 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>