A Constructive Look at TempleOS (2015)

Re:A Constructive Look at TempleOS (2015) by im_down_w_otp on Sunday March 26, 2017 @06:14PM (#13963623)

I don't understand the definition of "unikernel" here. There's nothing preventing a microkernel architecture from being the basis of a unikernel.

Unikernel isn't the opposite of microkernel.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Constructive Look at TempleOS (2015) by laumars on Sunday March 26, 2017 @07:03PM (#13963871)

I didn't actually say a unikernel couldn't be a micro kernel though; just that there was a tendency for them to be monolithic.

Unless I've overlooked a bunch of kernels - and I'm happy to be proven wrong - usually you'll find unikernels to be monolithic because those two approaches address the similar objectives in kernel design (namely simpler layout and improved performance).

However correlation or not, you're probably right that my point regarding monolithic kernels wasn't entirely relevant to the rest of my post and thus just risks confusing things.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Constructive Look at TempleOS (2015) by nickpsecurity on Sunday March 26, 2017 @07:05PM (#13963881)

The ones I've seen so far are both monolithic and hosted on drivers/kernel of something monolithic. That's probably the rule for now.

[ Parent | on HN ]