3 ms·
I disagree. Sure it's bloated if you need / want all the features that create the bloat. However, if there are user's who require very few features then they en
by rapind 17y ago
I disagree. Sure it's bloated if you need / want all the features that create the bloat. However, if there are user's who require very few features then they end up with a very slim system.
It's only marketing spin if you will always need all of the features in order to do anything meaningful.
- jerf 17y agoAfter that reply, I find myself wondering if you actually know what the "Linux module system" is, because there is no difference between what you claim is an advantage and what Linux actually has. Are you still having this debate with a purely academic definition of "monolithic" vs. "micro" kernels? Because neither of them exist anymore, and haven't for a long time; it's like CISC vs. RISC, in that arguing about it today is really missing the point since most everything is a mix. You need to address what Linux actually is, and what real microkernels exist, and what real performance they have, not regurgitate boring arguments from the 1980s that have simply been superceded (rather than one side "winning"). In fact, this goes for all you other commenters still having this argument. "Compare and contrast a microkernel running on CISC vs. a monolithic kernel running on RISC. Which will run best on a top-of-the-line Amiga, and how can this be best leveraged into flaming those who disagree with you?"