[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Mach emulation

From: Niels Möller
Subject: Re: Mach emulation
Date: 13 Nov 2000 12:26:29 +0100

Farid Hajji <address@hidden> writes:

> The libmom we're thinking about right now should provide a minimal
> set of kernel abstractions. I already had in mind to keep libmom
> as close to L4 as possible, without loosing the potential for
> portability to other systems/[u]kernels. L4 seems already minimal
> enough and the biggest part of libmom[-l4] should reflect the L4 ABI
> as closely as possible (BTW, no clans involved here!).

To me, this seems quite useless. If the API of the library is very
close to L4's, I don't see any point in it. Why not use L4 directly,
if that is the level of abstraction that you want?

For a "libmom" to be useful, its API should be closer to the services
that Hurd servers and programs *need*, and the implementation of
libmom should be free to do things differently depending on the
underlying kernel used.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]