LibOS – A library operating system for Linux

Post by agumonkey » Wed, Mar 25, 2015, 1:49 AM UTC

keenerd wrote: post #29

agumonkey wrote: post #14

Reminded me of that quote: "An operating system is a collection of things that don't fit into a language. There shouldn't be one." --DanIngalls

There are environments that do not have a strong distinction between OS and language. While adored by their users, for some reason they are never very popular. Oberon, Smalltalk and the old Lisp Machines come to mind. (Maybe Forth too, though most "Forth OSes" never tried to do multitasking or even file systems.) I suspect there are anti-network effects holding them back. They support one language and one language on…

Post by svieira » Wed, Mar 25, 2015, 2:53 AM UTC

keenerd wrote: post #29

agumonkey wrote: post #14

Reminded me of that quote: "An operating system is a collection of things that don't fit into a language. There shouldn't be one." --DanIngalls

There are environments that do not have a strong distinction between OS and language. While adored by their users, for some reason they are never very popular. Oberon, Smalltalk and the old Lisp Machines come to mind. (Maybe Forth too, though most "Forth OSes" never tried to do multitasking or even file systems.) I suspect there are anti-network effects holding them back. They support one language and one language on…

Post by api » Wed, Mar 25, 2015, 4:09 AM UTC

keenerd wrote: post #29

agumonkey wrote: post #14

Reminded me of that quote: "An operating system is a collection of things that don't fit into a language. There shouldn't be one." --DanIngalls

There are environments that do not have a strong distinction between OS and language. While adored by their users, for some reason they are never very popular. Oberon, Smalltalk and the old Lisp Machines come to mind. (Maybe Forth too, though most "Forth OSes" never tried to do multitasking or even file systems.) I suspect there are anti-network effects holding them back. They support one language and one language on…

Post by mintplant » Wed, Mar 25, 2015, 5:00 AM UTC

teraflop wrote: post #17

arunc wrote: post #16

The author forgot to add a license for this project. What shall we assume?

It was submitted as a patch series to the Linux kernel mailing list, with proper "Signed-off-by" headers in the commit messages. So presumably it's usable under GPLv2. EDIT: I was referring to the kernel support, but it looks like you might have been talking about the code on Github which uses the LibOS API. That does indeed seem to be missing a license.

Post by teraflop » Wed, Mar 25, 2015, 7:26 AM UTC

mintplant wrote: post #37

teraflop wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was submitted as a patch series to the Linux kernel mailing list, with proper "Signed-off-by" headers in the commit messages. So presumably it's usable under GPLv2. EDIT: I was referring to the kernel support, but it looks like you might have been talking about the code on Github which uses the LibOS API. That does indeed seem to be missing a license.

Do you mean https://github.com/libos-nuse/net-next-nuse ? There's a COPYING file: https://github.com/libos-nuse/net-next-nuse/blob/nuse/COPYIN... (GPLv2, taken from the kernel)