help-hurd
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: If QNX is successful, why NOT GNU Microkernels

From: Alfred M. Szmidt
Subject: Re: If QNX is successful, why NOT GNU Microkernels
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 12:47:36 +0100 (MET) 
   Mach is completely separate (micro)kernel from L4, and last I've
   heard, there's no such thing as "L4Mach".  Also, it should be "GNU
   Mach" and "OSKit Mach" (I only guess for this one, there may be some
   different punctuation in "OSKit").

Nitpick, OSKit Mach is GNU Mach 2.x (or some such version number) or
CVS HEAD, GNU Mach is GNU Mach 1.x.


Cheers.
reply via email to
[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]