Messages in this thread | | | Date | 07 Dec 2002 22:34:00 +0200 | From | (Kai Henningsen) | Subject | Re: is KERNEL developement finished, yet ??? |
| |
torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds) wrote on 05.12.02 in <aso4kq$2ka$1@penguin.transmeta.com>:
> In article <000901c29c5d$6d194760$2e833841@joe>, > Joseph D. Wagner <wagnerjd@prodigy.net> wrote: > > > >Unix (and Linux) developers are far too concerned with clinging to the > >30-year-old outdated POSIX standard, which creates numerous problems when > >trying to advance new features. > > No. > > Only stupid people think they should throw away old proven concepts. > What happens quite often in academia in particular is that you find a > problem you want to fix, and you re-design the whole system around your > fix.
Well, yes and no.
Yes, it's usually a bad idea to do that and expect to get a production- level kernel out of it.
But on the other hand, there's a lot that *could* be done with OS kernels that has never been tried (even though I certainly couldn't give a list). Until someone implements one of those ideas, and experiments with the results for a while, it's impossible to know what it would be worth in practice. (I certainly wouldn't want to trust a theoretical evaluation!)
Then, *if* it looks good in an experimental OS, people still need to figure out how to make use of it in a more traditional kernel. Sometimes that's where it breaks. Sometimes not.
If you just remember that academic OSes are *research*, not production material, then they are fine. Unfortunately, too many people (including many academics) forget that.
There's a reason we have both science and engineering, and they're not the same discipline.
MfG Kai - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |