Is Linux the greatest computer kernel ever made?

So what needs to be done?

No. Anything UNIX and Fork-Based is broken by design. In the real world, system calls have a noticeable overhead and this is why NT will always be faster - it uses more configurable, more powerful, more complex system calls and thus usually only needs a single syscall for things unices need dozens for.

Install OpenBSD.

>GUI still in kernel
kek just go back to India, capsoc

Attached: Screenshot_20190503_155110.png (722x507, 10K)

free open source, very scalable, and copyleft'd
>win win win.

>dabs on Clets

Attached: redox.png (1920x1080, 1.02M)

Nobody's using that gay shite. It's made by communist trannies.

>your brain on Jow Forums

>throw a bunch of contrarian buzzwords
>look totally smart on Jow Forums

Attached: 1493814148721.jpg (618x506, 28K)

Apparently it's very stable. Stability means a lot to power users and server admins. You can also update it without rebooting, reducing downtime.

>GUI still in kernel
OpenBSD is trash, but still.
Winfags BTFO

Isn't the project lead an ancap?

It's trash penquinware made by a grey haired faggot, it is fading into oblivion by trannies who have taken over development.

There's no such thing as ancaps, it's just Jewish commies trying to take the piss out of libertarians.

OpenBSD > Linux > Windows.

Why did OS development just kinda die and any new OS tries to be Unix-like?

No the project lead seems to be a conservative family man. There was an extremist contributor who worked on the filesystem stuff be he appears to be dead.

because there is no reason to do anything any other way. unix is perfect and we need to appreciate that it was lucky enough to become as popular as it is.

Because there's so much shit that people need that's built on top of *nix as a foundation, so anything new basically has to either be a fully compatible "me too!" clone of it, or needs to implement at least a partial compatibility layer for it.

>unix is perfect
That is wrong. You are saying it because there is hardly anything different from Unix.

doc.cat-v.org/bell_labs/utah2000/

Also, companies basically make OS kernel for a specific set of hardware. No one in its right mind would target the huge clusterfuck that is PC-compatibles and smartphones. Linux came at the right time with the right development model, when BSD was in legal hell.

Incorrect. Unix had some incredible ideas that work well and more developers should take notes from, but it wasn't, isn't, and will never be perfect.
There's a few issues with the Unix model. For an OS designed around little single-purpose tools coming together to become a greater whole, it amazes me that it still predominantly uses a monolithic kernel. Shouldn't the ideal Unix be a microkernel system with all of the components typically found in kernelspace separated out into separate, interconnecting processes?
Unix was also designed around a time when security research was still, comparatively to today, in its infancy. The standard model for permissions is a simple DAC system with rwx on owner, group, and others. There's been some modernizations such as MAC with SELinux, but perhaps a more efficient modern solution would be implementing something that strictly and transparently implements least privilege, such as Capability-based security, which theoretically would do away with ACLs altogether.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capability-based_security

unix is a philosophy
>programs should work really well together instead of trying to do everything
It's either this or the opposite. And the opposite sucks.

Look up minix, hurd, fuchsia in design they are a lot more elegant but their code is still too young to compare to linux so try to help their development
This, in theoretical terms sure but the thing is minix performance still sucks after almost 50 years

this

Attached: 1473295856923.gif (500x500, 2.51M)

The kernel being monolithic or micro doesn't matter to me. Systems research failed to produce a way of designing distributed applications that work without needing to go deep inside protocolar details. Thes should be transparent. I have Plan 9 in mind, but still, its usage too obnoxiously obscure and contrarian for its worth.

Linux is the best usable kernel. Some of the hobbyist/academic stuff is technically better, but none of them have any practical uses.

It's the fastest monolithic kernel ever made. I don't particularly care though because I'm not a fan of monolithic kernels.

>linux
>computer
>kernel
pick 1

Backwards compatibility's a bitch.

Unix is an environment. Linux has not much in common with AT&T unix's kernel.
Mac Os X is a certified UNIX os but has a micro kernel.

You're a fucking retard. Literally the first thing OpenBSD does post install is fetch binary firmware for device drivers with fw_update.