[lkml]   [2003]   [Oct]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 2.7 thoughts: common well-architected object model
it's exposing many of the syscalls into relevant
user-space objects which makes the other OSs approach
neat. Coming from the kernel an outline of a common
object model should be suggested which is then
actually populated and refined futher by e.g. the GUI

The other way around has shown not to work with the
many application-designed component frameworks out
there. In the other OS you'll be able to do things in
I/O, process, GUI, data access etc. in a quite similar
way. The current permutation in Linux for putting
together an application is staggering, which can force
people to use the lowest common denominator - like
libc.a ;) - it's actually not funny.

A core component model has to be defined by the kernel
group and then trickle upward. That's the only way
where you can sufficiently design in performance and
security(*) considerations which I agree should allow
Linux to scale as well as it does.

(*) good example for the opportunity in leaping the
other OS here: there is another big void in a sound
security component properties right now. COM+ has
quite a bit in it, but there is much more which could
be done and people are keen on it. Another item where
Linux could start to define the envelope.

--- wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 10:13:55 PDT, you said:
> >
> > unfortunately it's rather a jump into elegance.
> The
> > other OS component model is quite well
> architected.
> > Hence what's needed is _a similar architecture
> effort
> > which may _abstract many things in the beginning
> to be
> > filled in later. Ther's a dire need for a sound
> and
> > similarly elegant (or better) model.
> Two words: "syscall interface".
> Most of what you're blathering about needs to happen
> in userspace.
> If there's disagreement over what GUI style to use,
> the kernel is
> NOT going to provide any guidance. KDE versus Gnome
> versus the
> other 23 window managers - that's all userspace.
> The reason there's
> 25 window managers is because 25 sets of people had
> *different goals*.
> The kernel wisely stayed *OUT OF THE WAY*.
> With a single common object model, Linux can push
> the envelope in ONE
> direction. Which is why That Other System scales so
> incredibly well from
> a Zaurus to a 128-CPU NUMA box, handles different
> GUIs for different goals,
> and all the rest of that.....

> ATTACHMENT part 2 application/pgp-signature

Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:49    [W:0.058 / U:1.416 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site