Page 1 of 1
OS project (new DESIGN)
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:50 am
by arming
First of all, I know that this design is very bad
, but I'm going to present my OS idea.
Well, now you can laugh
.
The Bootloader is going to be written in ASM (not in Python
), and all the Kernel (exokernel) will be written in C.
What do you think about that? I know that is very bad, but what have I to correct? All?
Thanks.
Re: OS project
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:16 am
by Qeroq
Seems to be pretty much the standard approach, a microkernel + vfs and networking; not to much exokernel-stuff in there, as far as I can see. A bit too generic at some point: A "Security Manager" "analyse security", yes, but how do you plan to do that?
Be a bit more specific on what entities you have, whether they reside in the kernel or in userspace, in different processes etc.
Anyway, it looks quite nice; which application did you use to create it?
Re: OS project
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:30 am
by arming
Farok wrote:Seems to be pretty much the standard approach, a microkernel + vfs and networking; not to much exokernel-stuff in there, as far as I can see. A bit too generic at some point: A "Security Manager" "analyse security", yes, but how do you plan to do that?
Be a bit more specific on what entities you have, whether they reside in the kernel or in userspace, in different processes etc.
Anyway, it looks quite nice; which application did you use to create it?
I'm agree with you, I'll change it. I have designed it before that I have decided that the kernel would be a exo-kernel, and it's very generic.
I designed it with XMIND.
Thanks.
Re: OS project
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:37 am
by Kevin
Why is the shell a separate item and not included in "Apps"?
Re: OS project
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:57 am
by arming
Kevin wrote:Why is the shell a separate item and not included in "Apps"?
well, a shell is an app, but I prefer to separate it because with the shell you can execute other apps.
Re: OS project
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 11:26 am
by rdos
arming wrote:Kevin wrote:Why is the shell a separate item and not included in "Apps"?
well, a shell is an app, but I prefer to separate it because with the shell you can execute other apps.
Any app can usually execute any other app. The usual scenario is that a new app is started with a syscall that any app can use.
Re: OS project
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 11:50 am
by arming
rdos wrote:arming wrote:Kevin wrote:Why is the shell a separate item and not included in "Apps"?
well, a shell is an app, but I prefer to separate it because with the shell you can execute other apps.
Any app can usually execute any other app. The usual scenario is that a new app is started with a syscall that any app can use.
well, I've expressed badly. But I think that the Shell is more important than the other apps. so I think that it has to be separated.
Re: OS project
Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2011 4:24 pm
by arming
It sounds stupid, but why not? This hypothetical OS would change to Local Mode or to Net Mode depending of the network availability.
Re: OS project (new DESIGN)
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:14 pm
by arming
berkus wrote:Looks pretty weak. Think more?
OK, I will think about it and I will design another time.
berkus wrote:What happens when you intermittently lose network connection?
The best way would be that if the Network Manager detected an intermitent connection => local mode. I'll include that in the next design.
Re: OS project (new DESIGN)
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:14 pm
by arming
berkus wrote:Looks pretty weak. Think more?
OK, I will think about it and I will design another time.
berkus wrote:What happens when you intermittently lose network connection?
The best way would be that if the Network Manager detected an intermitent connection => local mode. I'll include that in the next design.
Re: OS project (new DESIGN)
Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 4:31 am
by CrypticalCode0
It might be just me but where does the Process Manager get feed back from?
Re: OS project (new DESIGN)
Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 5:03 pm
by arming
CrypticalCode0 wrote:It might be just me but where does the Process Manager get feed back from?
OK, I'll explain you. Process manager and Memory Manager are two elements that I have not worked enough (well, I have not worked enough anything, but the others are more worked that theese two elements), so I have relationed Memory Manager => Process Manager.