I don't think license is a problem. GPL code is free to distribute if
you ship the source code along... which we do anyways. The problem might
be when people will want to distribute an improved uuu with
closed-source compoenents... but a BSD kernel could be a nice
solution... even if I know nothing about them.
Le 10/3/2005, "Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse" <jasper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
a écrit:
> >It lacks persistence and its new UI. But we have bigger problems,
>
> >especially on the stability side. OSKit doesn't seem to be a very good
>
> >friend. So we do investigate new avenues. Here are some:
>
> >
> > - Building uuu over a microkernel (L4 for one)
>
> > - Building uuu over Linux kernel (not over a Linux distribution, make
>
> >sure to understand the difference)
>
> > - Get OSKit out of there and start from scratch with few device drivers.
>
> >
> > On the Linux front, I found LPSM (http://freshmeat.net/projects/lpsm/),
>
> >which allows to implement memory persistence. It's old, in early alpha
>
> >stages and abandoned as I can understand. But it could be interesting to
>
> >test it. Maybe I'm wrong, but if we can build our core with LPSM as the
>
> >python interpreter memory management library, we could turn it very
>
> >quickly into a persistent memory environment. We could then take the
>
> >development of LPSM as part of our efforts (it's LGPL anyways).
>
>I am a quite a Unix-lover and I have tested quite some Unices. But I
>think, from the perspective of usability and performance, it's best to
>either build UUU over L4 or Mach, or build UUU over the Linux kernel.
>But if you use the Linux kernel I'm not very sure whether it'll work
>with licenses and such, since some UUU-code is BSD-licensed. So if the
>license is and issue, build UUU over the 4.4 BSD kernel. It's reliable,
>stable and rocks like no other kernel.
>
>But that's just me talking... ;-)
>
>Jasper
>
>
|
