Timeline for Would an executable need an OS kernel to run?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 29, 2018 at 2:25 | comment | added | curiousguy | The Macintosh System, before MacOS X, was an OS of a general purpose computer, running on general purpose CPU (68000 family, PowerPC) with support for memory protection for decades (except the first 68000 based computers I think) that never used memory protection: any program could access anything in memory. | |
| Jul 28, 2018 at 0:11 | comment | added | LawrenceC | I'm explaining how things are if A) there is a kernel and B) if you are running code on a CPU with user/supervisor mode and an MMU to help enforce that. Yes, there are CPUs and microcontrollers without MMUs or user/supervisor mode, and yes some systems run without using the whole user/supervisor infrastructure. Microsoft's first Xbox was like this - even though a standard x86 CPU with user/supervisor mode, from what I understand it never left kernel mode - the loaded game could do whatever it wanted. | |
| Jul 28, 2018 at 0:02 | comment | added | Chris Stratton | This is not entirely correct. The requirement that hardware access go through the kernel, or that there even be a kernel, is a design decision made in the affirmative on many systems today, but also made in the negative (even to this day) on many simple systems. | |
| Jul 27, 2018 at 18:51 | history | answered | LawrenceC | CC BY-SA 4.0 |