Open Source 3.1 compatible OS?

[Fats]

larsef wrote:
Although I have read it before, I don't understand why it's impossible to add memory protection. What is the problem with isolating the applications from each other?

The whole amiga system is build up around message passing between tasks. It was assumed that data generated in one task is accessible by other tasks. Taking this feature away makes the whole system fall apart.
Although I still have a plan in the back of my mind about a single address space but with different access rights for different tasks.

greets,
Staf.

[Fats]

SamuraiCrow wrote:
 IIRC UN*X, and its clones load a separate copy of the .SO file into each address space so it wastes a TON of memory.

This is not true. The .so will only be in the physical memory once but mapped to different virtual addresses in different memory spaces.

greets,
Staf.

[Fats]

Piru wrote:
@Tomas

No you really can't have any effective memory protection if you intend to use AmigaOS. It's not just applications, it's the OS itself.

I don't fully agree with this statement. Sure you can't have UNIX style MP where every process lives in it's own adress space. But I think it should be possible to have one adress space but make some of your memory read-only to other tasks. At least this should make it possible to make the core OS uncrashable. Of course programs not using this feature to protect their own memory can still be crashed by other programs that have a wild pointer.
I agree though this will be a major undertaking especially to get it right and performant.