3 ms·
A lot of this really seems dishonest. "no dynamic linking" (by implementing dynamic linking) "no zombies" (as long as your programs aren't buggy) I fail to s
by o11c 1y ago
A lot of this really seems dishonest.
"no dynamic linking" (by implementing dynamic linking)
"no zombies" (as long as your programs aren't buggy)
I fail to see any meaningful distinction from what we have today. If it was more reliable, it was due to being smaller in scope and with a barrier to entry.
- jrmg 1y ago“Microkernel” (but everything’s in the same address space)
- o11c 1y agoThere is an important distinction between "one address space" and "one set of memory permissions". The former is usually a good idea (for debuggability if nothing else!) if you don't need to support `fork`; the latter is the problem. On modern Linux systems you can even do separate sets of memory permissions within a single process (and single address space), with system calls needed only at startup; see `pkeys(7)`. https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/pkeys.7.html https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/pkeys.7.html (note however that there aren't enough pkeys available to avoid the performance problem every microkernel has run into)
- icedchai 1y agoNot to mention any errant program could easily take down the OS because there was no memory protection. Amiga users quickly became familiar with the “guru meditation” screen, which was the system’s BSOD.
- ghusbands 1y agoI don't think there's intentional dishonesty in it - the author is just biased to seeing everything Amiga very positively.