LinuxQuestions.org
Visit the LQ Articles and Editorials section
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions
User Name
Password
Linux - Distributions This forum is for Distribution specific questions.
Red Hat, Slackware, Debian, Novell, LFS, Mandriva, Ubuntu, Fedora - the list goes on and on... Note: An (*) indicates there is no official participation from that distribution here at LQ.

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 09-07-2004, 11:01 PM   #1
Thaidog
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Hilton Head, SC
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 616

Rep: Reputation: 32
Question Is there an x86 linux distro w/ a micro kernel?


Is there an x86 linux distro w/ a micro kernel?

There was mk linux for power pc... I'm looking for something today for x86 that's well kept? Asking too much?
 
Old 09-07-2004, 11:22 PM   #2
slackMeUp
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: Slack-where?
Posts: 654

Rep: Reputation: 30
Yes you are asking to much. ..

mk/linux was the linux kernel running ontop of a microkernel (but I can't remember which microkernel. . mach maybe)

The Linux kernel is not a microkernel, nor ever will be. . .

Maybe you should try out other *nix like OSes that use microkernels. . . if you are interested in them that is. ..

or maybe you should read up on just what a microkernel is. . . before asking questions like this again that is.
 
Old 09-08-2004, 01:10 AM   #3
Thaidog
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Hilton Head, SC
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 616

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 32
Quote:
Originally posted by slackMeUp
Yes you are asking to much. ..

mk/linux was the linux kernel running ontop of a microkernel (but I can't remember which microkernel. . mach maybe)

The Linux kernel is not a microkernel, nor ever will be. . .

Maybe you should try out other *nix like OSes that use microkernels. . . if you are interested in them that is. ..

or maybe you should read up on just what a microkernel is. . . before asking questions like this again that is.
Yes it was mach. thus mk linux... thus linux with a micro kernel.

Is there some kind of issue you'd like to bring to my attention? I think you've miss judged why I asked the question.
 
Old 09-08-2004, 05:05 AM   #4
slackMeUp
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: Slack-where?
Posts: 654

Rep: Reputation: 30
sorry. .. I thought you were asking for a Linux distro that just uses a microkernel. . . . Which would not make it a linux distro.



Anyway. . .

What do you need a microkernel for? Just wanna test things out?
 
Old 09-08-2004, 05:15 AM   #5
Thaidog
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Hilton Head, SC
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 616

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 32
Quote:
Originally posted by slackMeUp
sorry. .. I thought you were asking for a Linux distro that just uses a microkernel. . . . Which would not make it a linux distro.



Anyway. . .

What do you need a microkernel for? Just wanna test things out?
Well I was basically wondering as you suggested what makes linux, with a micro kernel, Linux instead of a BSD distro.

Also, since I'm more familar on the x86 side of things with Linux than BSD (all though I do own 2 OS X machines) I thought it might be more familiar and thus easier to use than a true BSD distro.

I'm also planning on buying a EE P4 with the new system I'm currently building and I thought that there might be performance benefits with a microkernel and a 2MB cache vs a monolithic kernel.
 
Old 09-08-2004, 01:50 PM   #6
slackMeUp
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: Slack-where?
Posts: 654

Rep: Reputation: 30
Well that makes some sense. ..

However, I don't feel that adding another layer to an OS is a good thing when it does not need to be done.

Remember, that with a microkernel, the linux kernel still does all the work for the userland linux apps. . .but just as a process ontop of the microkernel. So the extra cache would still help . . but not in the way might be thinking.

The BSD kernel. . . (BSDLight4.X) is a bulky mofo too, just not as bulky as Linux.

OSX uses mach, but where it lacks in kernel size, it makes up for with userland driver subsystems.

I would just stick with Linux. . . or BSD. Whichever works for you.

Mach is cool. .. but if you really want to get into microkernels and learn a bit about them. .. try GNU/Hurd and start writing your own drivers for it. (because it won't have support for your hardware)
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
People who call it M$ or Micro$oft or Micro$loth lowpro2k3 General 48 12-24-2007 01:19 AM
Picking a distro for an embbeded X86 system edude03 Linux - Laptop and Netbook 0 05-18-2005 07:44 PM
IOmega Micro Mini USB 256 MB FLash Drive in Linux Kernel 2.6! arys Linux - Hardware 0 02-07-2005 10:31 AM
Is there a x86-64 distro of Debian? SergeiTheSaint Debian 1 09-20-2004 10:55 AM
kernel 2.6.3--bk8 and NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-5336 video driver from Nvidia zdenkod Linux - Hardware 2 03-09-2004 06:38 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:58 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration