On 03/11/17 20:58, Edward Bartolo wrote:
> I know little about this Hurd 'little' thing, but it gives me the
> shivers like systemd.

Ah.  "I know little about it but I don't like it".

> Similar to the latter, there is a small core at the centre with all
> the other helper executables intercommunicating.

What?  I thought the criticism of systemd was that it was monolithic and
it's "core" was too large!

> Sounds too complicated to get the added advantage, of having a very
> minimal kernel running with root privileges, while all other helper
> executables that do not need root privileges, run with a lesser
> priviledge.

Huh?  Are you against the idea or the implementation?


> If I am remember well, MS Windows (the operating system) does have a
> micro-kernel, but is it more efficient with an extra layer of
> intercommunication?

In general the idea with microkernels is security and reliability, not
performance -- microkernel boosters will generally handwave and claim
the inefficiency is worth it and small anyway.

Before writing them off as fools don't forget that MacOS/iOS uses a
microkernel (famously one of the biggest/slowest).


> I will stay with Linux, even though it is a huge monolithic executable.

Like systemd?