It's very annoying to read every time from Linux fan boys that nothing outside Linux is worth even considering...
Here is some guy trying to do something for the software community, with very interesting alternatives to offer, and as usual those doing nothing (I assume they are doing nothing; if they were doing something I'm sure they wouldn't be so stupid) can only offer destructive criticism. It's a shame that Phoronix is full of these fools.
he's wasting his time. freebsd has thousands of deficiencies, instead of fixing freebsd's problems (the parent OS) he is making a extremely half-baked OS that even if "da coolest thing eva" would suck major balls. how about getting efi support for freebsd or KMS or wayland or improving its crappy bootspeed. there is a reason why linux eats freebsd's lunch in the enterprise (the only sector freebsd doesn't blow baby chunks) and its because it is superior in 90%+ of usecases.
but, oh no, create another useless hobby OS like haiku or debiankfreebsd. i'm am the idiot for being a realist.
DragonFlyBSD kernel is called hybrid, because it has message passing, which allows things to be moved into user-space.
Originally Posted by garegin
However I am not aware of any part of kernel actualy running in user-space at the moment. OK, they moved a bit into library.
you guys are idiots. How could it be a waste of time ? Waste of time has no mean in open source community. People do what they want to, and they like it. There is no global authority which manage what people should or should not do. Enjoying a software project could never be a waste of time, even if nobody is using it. The goal of an open source project is not to be use by a lot of people. The goal of an open source project is to provide software you like in the hope it will be useful. And dragonfly is an open source project. It provides software source code people can use/read/learn from. And some people actually do. Source code which is re-used is definitely NOT a waste of time.
You call it "waste of time" because you are not using it directly. That's so selfish ! YOU are not the whole open source community : what you don't use could be useful to others. And besides that, diversity is always great, because it highlights bad designs, and provides alternatives. This freedom is the strength of open source : people can always try their own ideas. And Linux is not a graal. It actually works pretty good, but it does not prove all other designs are flaw. So even if you don't use it, it could be useful to you.
Whould you have say Mach was a waste of time ? Multics ? L4 ? But without these projects, linux would not have been what it is. And now, Mach is used in millions of machines. Writing software could never be a waste of time.
Please point out to me what makes Windows a 'hybrid' OS. Net even Microsoft tries to pass their OS off as a hybrid anymore, it was likely just marketing blurb back when micro-kernels was all the rage in academia resulting in several projects started based upon that design during that era (all which has since died or are on permanent life support like the hurd). Again, what is the 'hybrid' aspect of Windows? Running drivers in userland? Linux can do that with FUSE.
Originally Posted by garegin
Windows is for all intents and purposes monolithic just like Linux and BSD's are, atleast I've never seen any technical explanation of what would make Windows a 'hybrid' as opposed to them. OSX has a mach component, but fro mwhat I've read the mach component in OSX is from a version of mach which predates the micro-kernel design so that's no 'hybrid' either: http://www.roughlydrafted.com/0506.mk1.html