<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><pre style="white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" class="">Well… I have a Linux kernel configured to run on a single 1.2M disquette (now it is running on usb flash drive) that is used as a proxy computer between the internet and my network. Many routers, software defined radios and other embedded systems are using the kernel without too much assle.</pre><pre style="white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" class="">The point is you pick and choose the drivers you need. The zillions of line of code are there if you need them but they are not necessary for everything. The kernel is highly configurable. If you need only two drivers, that’s what you will get, nothing else. You compile the kernel and you retrieve a small amount of binary. And it will be still there in 20 years.</pre><pre style="white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" class="">The inefficiency of Linux come from the huge amount of processes that are running behind the scene. I’m always amazed by the number of processes running in the background (The same for Windows and it’s worse with MacOS). But here, we are taking only the portion of Linux that talk to the hardware that we are interested with. Nothing else.</pre><pre style="white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" class="">>In Oberon's case it would mean using a multi-megabyte inefficient blob
>of millions of lines of code to support a tiny efficient kernel less
>than 0.1% of the size.
>So, you lose the efficiency, you lose the small size and simplicity,
>and you end up with something nearly as bloated as Linux -- but it's a
>very poor Linux that's not very compatible.
</pre><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>