In article <3B3B6F8F.EAA0F196@online.no>, Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen says...
>L4 clone. Mach has had its day. It supposedly was not a very good
>microkernel either. All the interesting developments in microkernels
>happened after mach was released :-)

I did notice that the HURD folks blamed most of their delays (and thus the rise
of Linux) on MACH.

>The L4 approach is to write at least the core kernel in assembly
>language and then use a high level language to create the rest of the
>system. That may limit the kind of hardware on which your kernel might
>run on. That need not be a disadvantage if you target SMP boards. Being

I'd think that would be a horrible disadvantage on the PC platform. Folks are
going to want to be able to boot off of SCSSI devices, CDROM drives, Floppies,
ZIP disks, LS-120's, PCMCIA drives, firewire drives, and whatever else they may
invent next week. Its OK to not support all that stuff at first, but it should
be doable.

---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
          home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com