| ▲ | adastra22 12 hours ago |
| NetBSD isn’t a microkernel. |
|
| ▲ | pests 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Who is calling it a microkernel? The post youre replying to calls it a “small kernel” - that does not imply it’s a microkernel tho, right? I didn’t think size has anything to do with it. |
| |
| ▲ | Dylan16807 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm not sure if it originally said small kernel, though I know for sure the italics weren't originally there. The wording is unclear in a couple ways. | | |
| ▲ | pests 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | I came back to maybe delete my comments as I felt I might have came off harsh, esp before I saw the dead comment chain. No ill will, was confused as well I think. |
| |
| ▲ | 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | bdhcuidbebe 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | adastra22 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | “I don’t know about other microkernels” implies that NetBSD is also a microkernel. It is not. Microkernel is not a size distinction. NetBSD kernel may even be smaller in terms of LOC or binary size than some microkernels. Idk. But that is beside the point. Microkernel is an *architecture*. It is a name for a specific type of kernel design, which NetBSD is not. | | |
| ▲ | pests 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Ah, these were dead so I didn’t see this confusion before my comment above. I read it as: “I don’t know about other microkernels [that support ZFS], but NetBSD is a small kernel [that supports ZFS]” | |
| ▲ | bdhcuidbebe 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | dang 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Can you please edit out personal swipes from your HN comments? You did it repeatedly, and the site guidelines ask you not to: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. It's great, of course, to provide correct information. But please do it without putdowns; you don't need them, and they acidify discussion. | | |
|
|
|
