Horst von Brand quoted Paul Jakma as saying:
> > correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't all the SysVR4 derived unices
> > (T64/IRIX/Solaris/Unixware) using Mach based kernels? And MacOS X too?
>
> All monolytic, except possibly MacOS X (don't know that one, and I
> remember
> Apple's Linux was on Mach, because they wanted to build their OS based on
> Mach, so it could be). WinNT was based on Mach, but is going to monolytic
> step by step too. The OS of the huge multiprocessor CRAYs was a
> microkernel
> OS running on what was essentially a cluster of machines with a very fast
> internal network, dunno what became of that.
I didn't know NT was Mach-based --- that's very interesting.
I chatted with Wilfredo Sanchez about this a few weeks ago. I thought
I understood him to say MacOS X was based on Mach, but the BSD services
were integrated into the kernel, not running as a server atop it.
On the plus side, QNX is also microkernel-based, and it's quite
successful in its niche --- although, of course, it won't be able to
compete with free software in the long run. Likewise for AmigaDOS.
I don't know of any other successful microkernel OSes. But then, I
don't know of that many successful OSes at all. Typically one OS
dominates a platform until the hardware becomes obsolete.
-- <kragen@pobox.com> Kragen Sitaker <http://www.pobox.com/~kragen/> The Internet stock bubble didn't burst on 1999-11-08. Hurrah! <URL:http://www.pobox.com/~kragen/bubble.html> The power didn't go out on 2000-01-01 either. :)- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 01 2000 - 02:18:29 EDT