4 ms·
Also, (I haven't run a BSD for several years, but, from memory) one of the biggest philosophical differences is that *BSD runs a monolithic kernel whereas Linux
by Nick_C 16y ago
Also, (I haven't run a BSD for several years, but, from memory) one of the biggest philosophical differences is that *BSD runs a monolithic kernel whereas Linux runs a modular kernel. Might not sound like much, but it is very different mindset when it comes to security, user-land and such. Is that still the case?
- koenigdavidmj 16y agoAll three of the major BSD derivatives have the ability to put parts of themselves in modules. They are all monolithic kernels, as is Linux. Monolithic, in kernel speak, does not refer to having everything compiled in; it is more concerned about what is in kernel space (can do anything it wants with the hardware) and what is in user space (what is restricted at the hardware level to playing in its own memory). Monolithic kernels have pretty much everything in memory, and microkernels have pretty much everything in moderately-privileged userspace processes that talk to each other via message passing.
- koenigdavidmj 16y agoEr, I apparently cannot be bothered to read my own posts. s/Monolithic kernels have pretty much everything in memory/Monolithic kernels have pretty much everything in kernel space/
- apotheon 16y agoIf it's any consolation, I understood what you meant.
- apotheon 16y agoWhat koenigdavidmj said is true. The kind of "modular" that applies to the Linux kernel (and applies just as much to the FreeBSD kernel) is not the same kind of "modular" as you get with a microkernel OS like MINIX 3. All the major BSD Unix systems and any OS that uses a Linux kernel are all monolithic kernel OSes.