Re: Sockets in Kernel Processes

There's no need to be a disrespectful.

I understood the implication of my question completely.

-----Original Message-----
From: Theo de Raadt [mailto:deraadt@cvs.openbsd.org] Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 10:30 PM To: Artur Grabowski
Cc: Jaime Lafleur-Vetter; misc@openbsd.org Subject: Re: Sockets in Kernel Processes

> Why is this question suddenly getting so popular? Why are people
suddenly
> trying to move userland into the kernel?

It's just another stupid new meme.

These are the same people who don't realize that many Windows crashes happen because they moved the equivelant of X11 into the kernel. Wow, but it crashes faster.

Things have gotten reliable enough that they forget the danger, the historical aspects that led us to Unix, and that seperated design makes things more reliable.

On the other side, we have the microkernel people who want seperation between everything. Yeah right.....

Do you need help?

In addition to our free technical library, Pantek provides professional IT services to companies who utilize Open Source software: Learn more about Pantek's Technical Support offerings Place an order for 24/7/365 Technical Support here Learn more about Pantek, who we are, and what we do Chat with a Live Operator Related openbsd.org Links advocacy announce bugs ipv6 misc ports ports-changes security-announce smp source-changes tech Request more information about Pantek

I believe that Unix does so well because of the middle ground approach. Received on Mon Nov 25 09:55:55 2002