Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fuchsia: a new operating system

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 324 posts

Re: Fuchsia: a new operating system

#311

Post by MichaelMoser123 »

pjmlp wrote: post #291
bonzini wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even with new features like Device Guard, Windows is all but a microkernel; parts of the GUI high-level primitives (like fonts) are in WIN32K.SYS. Even OS X moved a lot of drivers to kernel space, it's not a pure microkernel design like the Hurd. If anything, the closest thing to a microkernel that is in wide use is Xen, or Hyper-V.

Which is why I said hybrid, I didn't say it is a mikrokernel. In any case it is better than Linux will ever be. Regarding Xen and Hyper-V, there is a systems paper that states hypervisors are the revenge of mikrokernels.

With Xen you have Linux running as dom0, not exactly a microkernel; what am I missing?

Re: Fuchsia: a new operating system

#312

Post by dleslie »

reitanqild wrote: post #231
dleslie wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's no joe, but it sure as hell beats NetBeans.

If you tell me your beef with Netbeans I might be able to help. I have significant experience with all big Java IDEs, 3 months full time with Visual Studio (in addition to testing it on and off for years). Use Sublime regularily. Can use vim productivily for server config. Have used emacs enough to get a taste of it. But lately I find myself getting back to NetBeans whenever possible, not because of price but because…

It runs like a slug and sits atop a mountain of RAM that it hordes like a jealous dragon.

OTOH, my hobby programming is done on an HP Mini 101.

Re: Fuchsia: a new operating system

#313

Post by pjmlp »

MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #311
pjmlp wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is why I said hybrid, I didn't say it is a mikrokernel. In any case it is better than Linux will ever be. Regarding Xen and Hyper-V, there is a systems paper that states hypervisors are the revenge of mikrokernels.

With Xen you have Linux running as dom0, not exactly a microkernel; what am I missing?

Having Linux as dom0 is just a matter of convenience for the Xen project not to write everything themselves, they could eventually get rid of it.

The point of the paper is that an hypervisor behaves just like a mikrokernel, with guest systems running exactly the same way as applications would do on a mikrokernel OS.

Re: Fuchsia: a new operating system

#314

Post by andrewflnr »

paulddraper wrote: post #277
andrewflnr wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you want to implement something small with something that is large? Consider the size and amount of equipment involved in making watches. Or microchips, for that matter.

Do you carry that watch-making equipment on your wrist along with your watch?

Of course not. I only need them in my workshop/foundry/dev machine.

Re: Fuchsia: a new operating system

#315

Post by deno »

paulddraper wrote: post #275
deno wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not very fast, but it’s surprisingly easy on the resources, especially memory. Compare using VS Code w/ Typescript Language Service to any type of dev stack that includes the word “Scala.”

Scala with Emacs + Ensime

Do you have any experience using it with scala.js?

Re: Fuchsia: a new operating system

#316

Post by bonzini »

pjmlp wrote: post #291
bonzini wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even with new features like Device Guard, Windows is all but a microkernel; parts of the GUI high-level primitives (like fonts) are in WIN32K.SYS. Even OS X moved a lot of drivers to kernel space, it's not a pure microkernel design like the Hurd. If anything, the closest thing to a microkernel that is in wide use is Xen, or Hyper-V.

Which is why I said hybrid, I didn't say it is a mikrokernel. In any case it is better than Linux will ever be. Regarding Xen and Hyper-V, there is a systems paper that states hypervisors are the revenge of mikrokernels.

I am not sure what's left of the original microkernel design in the NT kernel. You could say Linux is hybrid too because of FUSE and VFIO.

But yes, I was thinking exactly of that paper when I mentioned hypervisors. It only applies to type 1 hypervisors though: not KVM, Beehyve, or OpenBSD vmm. Even VMware ESX is more of a hybrid kernel.

Re: Fuchsia: a new operating system

#317

Post by reitanqild »

dleslie wrote: post #312
reitanqild wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you tell me your beef with Netbeans I might be able to help. I have significant experience with all big Java IDEs, 3 months full time with Visual Studio (in addition to testing it on and off for years). Use Sublime regularily. Can use vim productivily for server config. Have used emacs enough to get a taste of it. But lately I find myself getting back to NetBeans whenever possible, not because of price but because…

It runs like a slug and sits atop a mountain of RAM that it hordes like a jealous dragon. OTOH, my hobby programming is done on an HP Mini 101.

Ok I guess even I would possibly go with something else if I was seriously resource constrained.

Re: Fuchsia: a new operating system

#318

Post by pjmlp »

bonzini wrote: post #316
pjmlp wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is why I said hybrid, I didn't say it is a mikrokernel. In any case it is better than Linux will ever be. Regarding Xen and Hyper-V, there is a systems paper that states hypervisors are the revenge of mikrokernels.

I am not sure what's left of the original microkernel design in the NT kernel. You could say Linux is hybrid too because of FUSE and VFIO. But yes, I was thinking exactly of that paper when I mentioned hypervisors. It only applies to type 1 hypervisors though: not KVM, Beehyve, or OpenBSD vmm. Even VMware ESX is more of a hybrid kernel.

Windows 10 thanks to UWP, Pico procresses taken from the Drawbrigde project and the MinWin rearchitecture is probably more closer to that model than the NT 4.0 descendants were.

Regarding hyperviors, actually I think only type 1 hypervisors make sense.

The type 2 were just a workound due to lack of hardware support.

Re: Fuchsia: a new operating system

#319

Post by michaelmrose »

pjmlp wrote: post #303
michaelmrose wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lets start with package formats, people discuss this matter as if it were building an app for ios vs android. 99.999% of the work is the application. Package formats are just different sets of instructions for building the same source code the works ultimately on any system so long as its required libraries are present. Continuing on with audio, virtually everyone uses pulseaudio. JACK is pretty much reserved for aud…

No, package formats aren't just different sets of instructions, because on each distribution certain files might land on different places. Plus someone has to keep track of those instructions for every single distribution. Finally, supporting the same format isn't enough, for example a RPM for SuSE isn't the same as a RPM for Red-Hat. Well, apparently you forgot there are people still using ALSA and OSS. When doing d…

The percentage of desktop users not using pulse is is a rounding error. Firefox doesn't even work without pulse anymore Notifications and menu systems are standardized. Printing doesn't require special work to work on different distros. Drag and drop just isn't part of what a window manager does period its more what your file manager does.

Your valid issues are pretty much limited to the fact that software must be packaged for several distros in order to be suitable for distribution on even most systems and file manager integration is still something that requires you to integrate with gnome AND kde to support most users.

Re: Fuchsia: a new operating system

#320

Post by andrewmchen »

deaddodo wrote: post #135
desdiv wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They are drawing everything in userspace with fast graphics render... Dumb question, does this mean that it's limited to software rendering only? You need to go through the kernel to talk to the GPU, right?

Depends on the OS design. It's really not a good design, but you could run everything in ring0 (x86), supervisor mode (ARM), etc. However, now any fault (user or OS) could halt your system and you have no memory protection or process separation.

You only have to run the privileged process that talks to the GPU in ring0 right?
Post reply on HN