From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Luke A. Guest" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ironclad, the hard-Real Time capable POSIX-like kernel written in SPARK/Ada, received an nlnet grant Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2024 17:27:44 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2024 18:27:45 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8a51513859acb765ef87f103ba620d3c"; logging-data="875486"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18OvKIi58qDV+P77w4oGI2xO70mY5Lpww4=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:5oTD6F6ukWD/hGAmwvCXEj7TiH0= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:66407 List-Id: On 05/10/2024 17:24, DrPi wrote: > Le 04/10/2024 à 22:05, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit : >> On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 19:52:12 -0000 (UTC), Kevin Chadwick wrote: >> >>> Isn't it true that monolithic kernels become more attractive when Cs >>> problens are removed with micro kernels swapping problems for new >>> problems? >> >> The microkernel proponents still seem to think there is a point to their >> idea, even after decades of real-world experience to the contrary. > Any evidence of this assertion ? > > You should try QNX. > My experience with QNX shows that it is far more stable than monolithic > kernels since buggy drivers can't cause the kernel to panic. > Also, you don't have to recompile the kernel each time a driver needs to > be recompiled. > I have many other arguments against monolithic kernels. Yeah, QNX was solid. Had the source at one point.