is Gnu mach capable of loading kernels from other operating systems on the top of it? in theory?
revant
Sometime on Dec 10, RN cobbled together some glyphs to say:
is Gnu mach capable of loading kernels from other operating systems on the top of it? in theory?
don't know about mach, but FreeBSD can.
is it VMWare on kernl level? do if thats possible, can i load FreeBSD and load nt's kernel on it and also use windows and BSD at the same time like process %1 is uname and %2 is winword.exe?
revant
On 12/11/05, Dinesh Joshi dinesh.a.joshi@gmail.com wrote:
What about Linux?
-- Dinesh A. Joshi
What is subhurd, is it close to booting multiple kernels simultaneously, so that there is no need of emulation and VMwares? everything is done @ kernel level?
can anyone explain me GNU mach and overall philosophy of Gnu Hurd in simple words? Like Mrugesh Karnik explaining me about SELinux, Thanks dude.**
revant
Sometime on Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 01:09:11PM +0530, (???????????????) Revant Nandgaonkar said:
can anyone explain me GNU mach and overall philosophy of Gnu Hurd in simple words? Like Mrugesh Karnik explaining me about SELinux, Thanks dude.**
If you care to read this first, then i'll try to explain what i know as of now.
http://www.ilug-bom.org.in/Data/Objects/M/MinutesMarch2005/viewObject
Espically read the presentation slides on microkernel orientation, for this talk.
Anurag
On Sun, 2005-12-11 at 12:38 +0000, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Saturday 10 December 2005 18:59, Philip Tellis wrote:
don't know about mach, but FreeBSD can.
What about Linux?
OK... I lost the entire context of the message. I know it is good to edit messages for brevity before replying to a list... but please, please don't make the context disappear.
Regards,
ah
On 12/11/05, Amol Hatwar amol@hatwar.org wrote:
OK... I lost the entire context of the message. I know it is good to edit messages for brevity before replying to a list... but please, please don't make the context disappear.
Regards,
Starting without context.
What is GNU/Hurd, Gnu Mach Kernel theory, Explain like Mrugesh explained about SELinux, very simple an a dummy can understand.
Can Mach load other kernels on the top of it, simultaneously, so that apps from different OS could run easily
Revant
On Sun, 2005-12-11 at 18:41 +0530, (रेवंत) Revant Nandgaonkar wrote: * chop *
Starting without context.
What is GNU/Hurd, Gnu Mach Kernel theory, Explain like Mrugesh explained about SELinux, very simple an a dummy can understand.
Can Mach load other kernels on the top of it, simultaneously, so that apps from different OS could run easily
OK. I doubt it. Please read this page carefully:
http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html
Basically, The Hurd is system of daemons that sit on top of a microkernel (like Mach or L4) to provide services that a monolithic kernel provides.
I guess the question deserves a better answer, and should be asked in the Hurd mailing list.
Regards,
ah
On Sunday 11 December 2005 14:29, Amol Hatwar wrote:
On Sun, 2005-12-11 at 18:41 +0530, (रेवंत) Revant Nandgaonkar wrote:
- chop *
Starting without context.
What is GNU/Hurd, Gnu Mach Kernel theory, Explain like Mrugesh explained about SELinux, very simple an a dummy can understand.
Can Mach load other kernels on the top of it, simultaneously, so that apps from different OS could run easily
OK. I doubt it. Please read this page carefully:
http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html
Basically, The Hurd is system of daemons that sit on top of a microkernel (like Mach or L4) to provide services that a monolithic kernel provides.
I guess the question deserves a better answer, and should be asked in the Hurd mailing list.
Regards,
ah
and my question was whether Linux had the capability of FreeBSD kernel to load multiple kernels on top of it.
*chop*
and my question was whether Linux had the capability of FreeBSD kernel to load multiple kernels on top of it.
You do have User Mode Linux (UML) don't you? :). Why, this very mail you are reading now is being was sent through Qmail running in a virtual server (Not One, but many Linux Kernels running on top of another Linux Kernel).
Regards,
ah
On 12/13/05, Amol Hatwar amol@hatwar.org wrote:
*chop*
and my question was whether Linux had the capability of FreeBSD kernel to load multiple kernels on top of it.
You do have User Mode Linux (UML) don't you? :). Why, this very mail you are reading now is being was sent through Qmail running in a virtual server (Not One, but many Linux Kernels running on top of another Linux Kernel).
Is this like VMWare? a single file handling filesystems and OS data?
Revant
(रेवंत) Revant Nandgaonkar wrote:
On 12/13/05, Amol Hatwar amol@hatwar.org wrote:
*chop*
and my question was whether Linux had the capability of FreeBSD kernel to load multiple kernels on top of it.
You do have User Mode Linux (UML) don't you? :). Why, this very mail you are reading now is being was sent through Qmail running in a virtual server (Not One, but many Linux Kernels running on top of another Linux Kernel).
Is this like VMWare? a single file handling filesystems and OS data?
Well, unlike they call it Virtual "Machine", UML is a kernel and can be called "Virtual OS". As the kernel itself provides its own system call interface to Kernels.
But you can achieve almost all the functionality VMWare can support except two major differences that I know.
1. You can port only Linux kernels on UML. 2. VMWare is not free (Freedom-wise and Money-wise), UML is *free*.
You can load multiple kernels simultaneously, run different applications/servers on different kernels. The UML kernel sits over the hardware and all other kernels are loaded into user space.
You can control the amount of Memory, Diskspace and CPU cycles utilized by the kernels sitting on top of UML. Each of these kernels are virtually "separate machines" but they don't have access to hardware directly. Instead they access virtual drives, virtual network adapters and Virtual X-windows displays provided by UML environment.
You can create filesystems that Linux supports (such as ext2, ext3, reiserfs..) and mount these UML filesystems.
Though UML is useful, it is not right for testing device drivers and it is currently ported only on x86 platform.
Regards,
On 13/12/05 10:46 +0530, (???????????????) Revant Nandgaonkar wrote:
On 12/13/05, Amol Hatwar amol@hatwar.org wrote:
*chop*
and my question was whether Linux had the capability of FreeBSD kernel to load multiple kernels on top of it.
You do have User Mode Linux (UML) don't you? :). Why, this very mail you are reading now is being was sent through Qmail running in a virtual server (Not One, but many Linux Kernels running on top of another Linux Kernel).
Is this like VMWare? a single file handling filesystems and OS data?
You may be looking for Xen.
Devdas Bhagat
On Tue, 2005-12-13 at 10:46 +0530, (रेवंत) Revant Nandgaonkar wrote:
On 12/13/05, Amol Hatwar amol@hatwar.org wrote:
*chop*
and my question was whether Linux had the capability of FreeBSD kernel to load multiple kernels on top of it.
You do have User Mode Linux (UML) don't you? :). Why, this very mail you are reading now is being was sent through Qmail running in a virtual server (Not One, but many Linux Kernels running on top of another Linux Kernel).
Is this like VMWare? a single file handling filesystems and OS data?
Single file handling filesystems, What does that mean?
Every kernel gets its own process space and filesystem.
Regards,
ah
On 12/14/05, Amol Hatwar amol@hatwar.org wrote:
Single file handling filesystems, What does that mean?
Every kernel gets its own process space and filesystem.
I installed VMware on fedora once, its like a virtual comp, in which i booted that virtual comp with WinXP iso and installed WinXP, Now for the real computer, It created a 4GB file and used it ad a hard disk for virtual comp. for the virtual comp it was a file system and everything separate, but for my tangible PC it was one single 4gb file
revant
-
(रेवंत) Revan t Nandgaonkar -
Amol Hatwar -
Anurag -
Devdas Bhagat -
Dinesh Joshi -
Philip Tellis -
Sameer N Ingole