Subject: http://advogato.org/article/888.html

"Recently there has been a fuss over monolithic and micro kernels -
specifically the direction of the Linux Kernel development. Free
Software is about "freedom of choice", and we should be able to choose
to compile the Linux Kernel as either a monolith or a microkernel. "

...

--
--
Mad Free Software Person, Visionary and Poet (http://lkcl.net)


2006-05-13 23:12:09

by David Woodhouse

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: http://advogato.org/article/888.html

On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 00:02 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> "Recently there has been a fuss over monolithic and micro kernels -
> specifically the direction of the Linux Kernel development. Free
> Software is about "freedom of choice", and we should be able to
> choose to compile the Linux Kernel as either a monolith or a
> microkernel. "

The GPL permits you the freedom to do this with the Linux kernel.

Like buggery, however, it falls into the category of things which are
perfectly acceptable between consenting adults, but best kept within the
privacy of your own home.

--
dwmw2

2006-05-13 23:15:36

by Stefan Smietanowski

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: http://advogato.org/article/888.html

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> "Recently there has been a fuss over monolithic and micro kernels -
> specifically the direction of the Linux Kernel development. Free
> Software is about "freedom of choice", and we should be able to choose
> to compile the Linux Kernel as either a monolith or a microkernel. "
>
> ...
>

Feel free to rewrite linux as a micro kernel. Let us know how that goes
for you.

// Stefan


Attachments:
signature.asc (253.00 B)
OpenPGP digital signature

2006-05-14 00:26:53

by Matthew Frost

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: http://advogato.org/article/888.html

(sorry; reply-all)
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> "Recently there has been a fuss over monolithic and micro kernels -
> specifically the direction of the Linux Kernel development. Free
> Software is about "freedom of choice", and we should be able to choose
> to compile the Linux Kernel as either a monolith or a microkernel. "
>
> ...
>

I love your tasteful choice of writing your diatribe on your site and
sending us a URL we can ignore. Didn't you cause this fuss last time?
Does that actually qualify as recently?

http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/10/2/89

You want another flame war?

This sounds suspiciously like the kind of 'freedom' where you say you
want something, and expect someone else to do the heavy lifting for you
to get it.

Read up on the actual freedoms involved in Free Software. They do not
cover "Freedom to Be Provided With The Kernel Binary Design of Your Choice".

You have the freedom to do with the kernel source what you wish, as long
as everyone after you keeps like freedom. You want a linux-like
microkernel, go for it. You have sufficient freedom, and sufficient
coding ability if we believe your CV, to make it happen. Scratch your
own itch.

You don't have the freedom to dictate development practice to an
existing development community with a longstanding project. This is not
an itch Linus wishes to scratch, and, as you acknowledge, it is not the
kind of change which will merge into mainline nicely.

Quit complaining and do the work, or help other people do the work,
since you know l4linux exists. No more diatribes.

2006-05-14 02:44:21

by Theodore Ts'o

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: http://advogato.org/article/888.html

+----------+
| PLEASE |
| DO NOT |
| FEED THE |
| TROLLS |
+----------+
| |
| |
.\|.||/..

2006-05-16 03:29:22

by Matthew Frost

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: http://advogato.org/article/888.html

Theodore Tso wrote:
> +----------+
> | PLEASE |
> | DO NOT |
> | FEED THE |
> | TROLLS |
> +----------+
> | |
> | |
> .\|.||/..
> -

Luke is right, and so are you, Ted. Rather than leave the above stand,
and not post to the topic again, it has been requested that I apologize,
and I agree with the necessity.

I would like to apologize for being a troll.

I did the inflammatory reaming in public; only fair I should do the
conciliatory gesture in public. My contributions to the discussion were
a) noise, b) not a positive contribution to the topic, c) bad-spirited,
and d) partially ad hominem. Additionally, they constituted an
unnecessary response to the topic, because the people involved in the
respective subject areas are more than capable of responding sensibly
and effectively and positively. If, indeed, I believe someone to be
trolling the list, I should ignore him and reduce the noise; I should
not have sounded off at Luke in the manner in which I did. That was
uncalled for, and I apologize.

If I wish to positively contribute to the mailing list in the future, I
shall try to do so where I have relevant, useful, well-formed questions,
or relevant, useful, well-informed answers. I will keep a civil tongue.

Matthew Frost

2006-05-18 01:03:36

by Kurt Wall

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: http://advogato.org/article/888.html

On Sun, May 14, 2006 at 12:02:06AM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton took 16 lines to write:
> "Recently there has been a fuss over monolithic and micro kernels -
> specifically the direction of the Linux Kernel development. Free
> Software is about "freedom of choice", and we should be able to choose
> to compile the Linux Kernel as either a monolith or a microkernel. "

Good luck with that.

Kurt
--
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
-- Arthur C. Clarke