perand@admin.kth.se (Per Andersson) (07/04/90)
>I read an article in one of the trade news magazines that stated that >OSF and Unix International had decided on different emphasis in their >system's development. Supposedly, OSF was going to remove features in >favor of speed. Is this true ? I wonder. My understanding is that OSF, as is one of the basics in MACH will remove as much as possible from the KERNEL. Not from the end product. Stuff that's really not need to be there will be in threads outside of the kernel. AT&T has some trend where they stuff everything in the kernel it seems. Why, one day we might even have 'vi' in there :-) Feel free to comment if I'm wrong, otherwise perhaps not. Per -- --- Per Andersson Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden perand@admin.kth.se, @nada.kth.se
meo@rsiatl.UUCP (Miles ONeal) (10/10/90)
perand@admin.kth.se (Per Andersson) writes: |>I read an article in one of the trade news magazines that stated that |>OSF and Unix International had decided on different emphasis in their |>system's development. Supposedly, OSF was going to remove features in |>favor of speed. |Is this true ? I wonder. My understanding is that OSF, as is one of the |basics in MACH will remove as much as possible from the KERNEL. Not from |the end product. Stuff that's really not need to be there will be in |threads outside of the kernel. AT&T has some trend where they stuff |everything in the kernel it seems. Why, one day we might even have 'vi' |in there :-) Correct. The OSF (and many of us) feel that the kernel has become too bloated. While the days of kernels that fit in 8-16K of memory may be long gone, 500K - 1M kernels are a bit much! As to vi being in the kernel, it would probably end up in the tty driver. If not, it might be the only entry in /usr/bin! Oh, well, we all know that's what happens when big corporations (or smaller ones, even) take products from the R&D folks & give them to mark- eting! -Miles please note how nicely each paragraph adjusted itself!
davidsen@antarctica.crd.ge.com (william E Davidsen) (10/10/90)
In article <3650@zorba.Tynan.COM>, perand@admin.kth.se (Per Andersson) writes: |> Feel free to comment if I'm wrong, otherwise perhaps not. AT&T assures me that they have no intensions of putting vi in the kernel.