Linux people doing Linux things, it seems.

  • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 months ago

    I think the point of redox is more than just rewriting Linux in Rust. Architecturally they are very different. Redox uses the more modern microkernel approach, whereas Linux is a modular monolith. There are advantages and disadvantages to both designs. They are actually polar opposites in fact. The compromise is something called a hybrid kernel which is used by Windows NT.

    • Octorine@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      This is true, but the differences go even further than that. Redox is intentionally non-posix-compliant. This means that userspace programs written for posix operating systems may or may not need patching to even compile.

      Part of the philosophy of Redox is to follow the beaten path mostly, but not be afraid of exploring better ideas when appropriate.

      • Croquette
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        What part of posix is redox trying to get away from?

        • Octorine@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m not sure. I remember seeing an example in the docs, but I can’t find it now. Actually the docs in general are a lot less opinionated than I remember them.

          One thing that I did find is that the ion shell document mentions that it isn’t a posix compliant shell because they would have had to leave out a bunch of features.

          • Croquette
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Makes sense. Posix was created a long time ago and there are most probably some features that could be changed