Let's talk about Leeeenux and his future. Does /g/ really

File: reading.jpg (123KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1280x720px

Linux implements the relevant features of a microkernel in its modularity.

>>59338772
>Linux implements the relevant features of a microkernel in its modularity.

Microkernels require less code to be run in the innermost, most trusted mode than monolithic kernels. This has many aspects, such as:

1 - Microkernels are more robust: if a non-kernel component crashes, it won't take the whole system with it. A buggy filesystem or device driver can crash a Linux system. Linux doesn't have any way to mitigate these problems other than coding practices and testing.

2 - Microkernels have a smaller trusted computing base. So even a malicious device driver or filesystem cannot take control of the whole system (for example a driver of dubious origin for your latest USB gadget wouldn't be able to read your hard disk).

3 - A consequence of the previous point is that ordinary users can load their own components that would be kernel components in a monolithic kernel.

>>59338843

there is pro & cons in both of them

1 - Monolithic kernel is much older than Microkernel. It’s used in Unix . while Idea of microkernel appeared at the end of the 1980's.
2 - the example of os having the Monolithic kernels are UNIX , LINUX while the os having Microkernel are QNX , L4 , HURD , initially Mach (not mac os x) later it will converted into hybrid kernel , even MINIX is not pure kernel because device driver are compiled as part of the kernel .
3 - Monolithic kernel are faster than microkernel . while The first microkernel Mach is 50% slower than Monolithic kernel while later version like L4 only 2% or 4% slower than the Monolithic kernel.
4 - Monolithic kernel generally are bulky . while Pure monolithic kernel has to be small in size even fit in s into processor first level cache (first generation microkernel).
5 - in the Monolithic kernel device driver reside in the kernel space . while In the Microkernel device driver reside in the user space.
6 - since the device driver reside in the kernel space it make monolithic kernel less secure than microkernel . (Failure in the driver may lead to crash) while Microkernels are more secure than the monolithic kernel hence used in some military devices.
7 - Monolithic kernels use signals and sockets to ensure IPC while microkernel approach uses message queues . 1 gen of microkernel poorly implemented IPC so were slow on context switches.
8 - adding new feature to a monolithic system means recompiling the whole kernel while You can add new feature or patches without recompiling.

>>59338726
Literally every succesful server OS to date has had a monolithic kernel.
Meanwhile microkernels are only found in embedded/appliance space and academia, and this has been the case for 40 years and counting.
Face it, microkernels on production servers are never happening.

>>59339037
like the year of linux desktop

>>59339144
Exactly.
I fail to see why everyone would want that anyway. Linux, and Unix in general, is a server OS that almost accidentally happens to run well on desktops. But it's not a normie OS and it will never be. Unix always required a certain level of sophistication from its users and never ever handed you anything on a silver plate. You worked your ass off and it eventually paid off because the system is buit by power users for power users. That's also why the recent joint venture of GNOME and Freedesktop into dumbing Linux down for normies will end up in an OS that is (a) not Unix, and (b) a critical failure.

>>59339421
>That's also why the recent joint venture of GNOME and Freedesktop into dumbing Linux down for normies will end up in an OS that is (a) not Unix, and (b) a critical failure.
Not necessarily.If we could ever get quality drivers,I really don't see why a GUI only version of Linux couldn't exist for the norm-tards.I mean,look at MacOs,it really isn't too far removed from Ubuntu at the moment.Strip the server shit out,implement a decent hardware detection during install,and get the drivers on par with everyone elses,and you could have a pretty popular OS.People use Android for fucks sake!Linux could easily surpass Androids quality with almost no effort from anyone but the likes of Nvidia,AMD,and various wifi vendors.

>>59338726
where have I heard this before but with other context... hummmm (((you)))