[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: KDE in the Kernel
From:       Dave Leimbach <leimbacd () bellsouth ! net>
Date:       2002-04-14 0:38:44
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sunday 14 April 2002 05:20 am, Sarang Lakare wrote:
> On a non-technical note : If we value freedom, then choosing which OS to
> run is also a "freedom" that we should value. Thus, we cannot force users
> to choose linux over any other OS (all the BSDs are pretty heavily used
> too)
>
Here Here!

> From a technical point of view : I really see no reason why konqueror would
> become faster if its in the kernel! Besides, konqueror is just a shell. In
> reality, all the stuff konqueror does is via plugins. Which means that to
> add konqueror to kernel means adding Qt, and most of KDE to the kernel.
> Instead, you can think of your new_kernel = current_real_kernel+Qt+KDE :)
> Which means that you already have konqueror in the kernerl itself!
>

Things that run at the kernel level don't necessarilly run any faster than 
user programs either.  They may have more permissions to mess the system up 
and direct access to crucial data structures but to even think of doing such 
a thing would begin to compromise portability.

Besides... how happy do you think Linus would be if he knew you thought about 
sticking C++ code in his kernel?  [Yes I know he has submitted bug reports 
and such to KDE and that he probably reads this list from time to time.]

Lastly I don't think IE is really that fast...  Fastest browser I have ever 
used is Opera.  I think it can be proven also that IE is really not in the 
WinNT/2k/XP kernel too.  MS claims that IE is part of the system but I don't 
believe removing it would be as crippling as they say.


>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]