Live data from Hacker News

CharlotteOS – An Experimental Modern Operating System

github.com

31–40 of 104 posts

Re: CharlotteOS – An Experimental Modern Operating System

#31

This is probably a better introduction it seems, than specifically the kernel of the OS: https://github.com/charlotte-os/.github/blob/main/profile/RE... > URIs as namespace paths allowing access to system resources both locally and on the network without mounting or unmounting anything This is such an attractive idea, and I'm gonna give it a try just because I want something with this idea to succeed. Seems the proje…

This looks like a very interesting project! Good luck to the team.

Re: CharlotteOS – An Experimental Modern Operating System

#32
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's still newer than Linux's system design.

In an operating system course I attended it was mostly Unix and everyone was used to bashing Windows NT ("so crappy, bsod etc.") but we had Stallings' book and I was surprised to learn that NT was in many ways an improvement over Unix and Linux.

NT the kernel is quite good. windows nt itself was not always great.

Re: CharlotteOS – An Experimental Modern Operating System

#33
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sad part is that there are too many ideas of old systems lost in a world that 30 years later seems too focused on putting Linux distributions everywhere.

There was also a period of time where everyone and their mom was writing a new operating system trying to replicate Linux’ success

Isn't what all those UNIX clones keep trying to do?

Re: CharlotteOS – An Experimental Modern Operating System

#34

This is probably a better introduction it seems, than specifically the kernel of the OS: https://github.com/charlotte-os/.github/blob/main/profile/RE... > URIs as namespace paths allowing access to system resources both locally and on the network without mounting or unmounting anything This is such an attractive idea, and I'm gonna give it a try just because I want something with this idea to succeed. Seems the proje…

Recompiling the whole kernel just to change drivers seems like a deal-breaker for wider adoption

If this kernel ever gets big enough where this might matter, I'm sure they can change the design. Nothing is set in stone forever and for the foreseeable future it's unlikely to matter.

Re: CharlotteOS – An Experimental Modern Operating System

#35

> GPLv3 or later (with proprietary driver clarification) What's that parenthetical mean?

Looks like it's explained here: https://github.com/charlotte-os/Catten/blob/main/License/cla...

Specifically, "Users may link this kernel with closed-source binary drivers, including static libraries, for personal, internal, or evaluation use without being required to disclose the source code of the proprietary driver.".

Re: CharlotteOS – An Experimental Modern Operating System

#36
post #32
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an operating system course I attended it was mostly Unix and everyone was used to bashing Windows NT ("so crappy, bsod etc.") but we had Stallings' book and I was surprised to learn that NT was in many ways an improvement over Unix and Linux.

NT the kernel is quite good. windows nt itself was not always great.

Is not always that great. Windows 11 is still based on the NT kernel. It's probably still good! Unfortunately the userland experience they put on top of it is just awful.

Re: CharlotteOS – An Experimental Modern Operating System

#37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be easy to tell for anyone seriously after you: If I kidnap you and make you log into your computer, and you log into the decoy state, it'd be obvious to see that the last time you visited any website etc. was over a month ago and so on.

For sure you'd have to use it from time to time.

Or, write a login script to touch files at random.

Re: CharlotteOS – An Experimental Modern Operating System

#38

This is probably a better introduction it seems, than specifically the kernel of the OS: https://github.com/charlotte-os/.github/blob/main/profile/RE... > URIs as namespace paths allowing access to system resources both locally and on the network without mounting or unmounting anything This is such an attractive idea, and I'm gonna give it a try just because I want something with this idea to succeed. Seems the proje…

Wish OP had put that as the main readme. The intro page is currently useless.

To be fair, the submission URL goes to the kernel specifically, so the README is good considering the repository it's in. The link I put earlier I found via the GitHub organization, which does give you an overview of the OS as a whole (not just the kernel): https://github.com/charlotte-os/

Re: CharlotteOS – An Experimental Modern Operating System

#39

This is probably a better introduction it seems, than specifically the kernel of the OS: https://github.com/charlotte-os/.github/blob/main/profile/RE... > URIs as namespace paths allowing access to system resources both locally and on the network without mounting or unmounting anything This is such an attractive idea, and I'm gonna give it a try just because I want something with this idea to succeed. Seems the proje…

In practice, the problem with URIs is that it makes parsing very complex. You don’t really want a parser of that complexity in the kernel if you can avoid it, for performance reasons if nothing else. For low-level resource management, an ad-hoc, much simpler standard would be significantly better.

Chuck Multiaddr in there (https://multiformats.io/multiaddr/), can be used for URLs, file paths, network addresses, you name it. Easy to parse as well.

Re: CharlotteOS – An Experimental Modern Operating System

#40
post #4

This is probably a better introduction it seems, than specifically the kernel of the OS: https://github.com/charlotte-os/.github/blob/main/profile/RE... > URIs as namespace paths allowing access to system resources both locally and on the network without mounting or unmounting anything This is such an attractive idea, and I'm gonna give it a try just because I want something with this idea to succeed. Seems the proje…

The choice of a pure-monolithic kernel is also interesting; I can buy that it's more secure, but having to recompile the kernel every time you change hardware sounds like it would be pretty tedious. Early days, though, so we'll see how that decision works out.

A monolithic kernel and resource locators that automatically mount network drives? That's just macOS.

(You don't have to recompile the kernel if you put all the device drivers in it, just keep the object files around and relink it.)

Post reply on HN