[Microkernel-devroom] FOSDEM 2013 - Microkernels / Component-based OSes devroom
FOSDEM 2013 - Microkernels / Component-based OSes devroom *CALL FOR PARTICIPATION* http://fosdem.org/2013 The developers of several free and open-source component- and/or microkernel-based operating systems will meet at FOSDEM 2013 in Brussels, Belgium and will share a developer room. The devroom is currently looking for content in the form of talks related to the area of component- and/or microkernel-based operating systems. Possible topics include, but are not limited to: * OS introduction to developers of other OS * Subsystems and architecture * Hardware and device drivers * Tools and languages * Release engineering and testing * Experience and learning from mistakes * Technical challenges * Community and life with an OS-project * Academia and education Please send your talk proposal(s) no later than by 2012-12-15 to: microkernel-devroom at lists.fosdem.org Make sure to include the following in your proposal: * title of your talk (will be printed in the FOSDEM booklet) * your full name (will be printed in the FOSDEM booklet) * a short abstract * duration of your talk (please, no longer than 45 minutes) The final devroom schedule (along with accepted talks) will be announced on the above mailing list on 2012-12-22. Moreover, the speakers will be notified via e-mail. The schedule will be also published on the FOSDEM web and in the FOSDEM booklet after 2013-01-10. If you do not want to give a talk yourself, you may still send suggestions for what else you would like to see, or do in the devroom. Please send your suggestions to the above mailing list. The devroom is scheduled for Saturday of February 2. The seating capacity of the room is 74 seats. Any changes will be announced in the above mailing list.
On 10/29/12 13:01, Stefan Kalkowski wrote:
FOSDEM 2013 - Microkernels / Component-based OSes devroom *CALL FOR PARTICIPATION* http://fosdem.org/2013
The developers of several free and open-source component- and/or microkernel-based operating systems will meet at FOSDEM 2013 in Brussels, Belgium and will share a developer room.
The devroom is currently looking for content in the form of talks related to the area of component- and/or microkernel-based operating systems. Possible topics include, but are not limited to:
* OS introduction to developers of other OS * Subsystems and architecture * Hardware and device drivers * Tools and languages * Release engineering and testing * Experience and learning from mistakes * Technical challenges * Community and life with an OS-project * Academia and education
Please send your talk proposal(s) no later than by 2012-12-15 to:
microkernel-devroom at lists.fosdem.org
Make sure to include the following in your proposal:
* title of your talk (will be printed in the FOSDEM booklet) * your full name (will be printed in the FOSDEM booklet) * a short abstract * duration of your talk (please, no longer than 45 minutes)
The final devroom schedule (along with accepted talks) will be announced on the above mailing list on 2012-12-22. Moreover, the speakers will be notified via e-mail. The schedule will be also published on the FOSDEM web and in the FOSDEM booklet after 2013-01-10.
If you do not want to give a talk yourself, you may still send suggestions for what else you would like to see, or do in the devroom. Please send your suggestions to the above mailing list.
The devroom is scheduled for Saturday of February 2. The seating capacity of the room is 74 seats. Any changes will be announced in the above mailing list.
So one thing I really would like to see is some form of presentation, or a poster even, that would nicely summarize the similarities and differences between many of the projects we're talking about here (ukernels, hypervisors, OSes, frameworks). E.g. which of the projects are really complementary to each other (e.g. one of them provides a ukernel while another provides "everything else" and really depends on that ukernel instead of being its competition)? Which ones are competition to each other and how they differ (e.g. for ukernels that would be a question of IOMMU support, power management support, etc). There is incredible amount of misinformation regarding this and I often get questions such as "How is Qubes OS different from the Nova hypervisor?", or "How is Qubes OS different from Genode OS Framework?" (the latter being pretty valid question BTW), etc. So, perhaps during this meeting there could be a session which would aim to create such a big picture diagram or something. Cheers, joanna.
Hi Joanna, hi folks,
So, perhaps during this meeting there could be a session which would aim to create such a big picture diagram or something.
That's a good idea. Last year there was a closing panel discussion on the microkernel devroom which might be a suitable place to organize such a "big diagram drawing" this time. Or would you prefer a separate session for it? Anyway, we should perhaps brainstorm the interesting criteria according to we would like to classify the various systems on this mailing list first, so that the "big diagram drawing" is somehow structured when it happens live. Alternatively, I can host a wiki page for it (on the HelenOS wiki). Therefore, in relation to Joanna's suggestion, I suggest to have a closing panel discussion again on the devroom. I also suggest to allocate a longer time slot for the panel discussion this time (at least twice as long as last time). Best regards Martin Decky HelenOS
On 10/30/12 11:16, Martin Decky wrote:
Hi Joanna, hi folks,
So, perhaps during this meeting there could be a session which would aim to create such a big picture diagram or something.
That's a good idea. Last year there was a closing panel discussion on the microkernel devroom which might be a suitable place to organize such a "big diagram drawing" this time. Or would you prefer a separate session for it?
Anyway, we should perhaps brainstorm the interesting criteria according to we would like to classify the various systems on this mailing list first, so that the "big diagram drawing" is somehow structured when it happens live. Alternatively, I can host a wiki page for it (on the HelenOS wiki).
Therefore, in relation to Joanna's suggestion, I suggest to have a closing panel discussion again on the devroom. I also suggest to allocate a longer time slot for the panel discussion this time (at least twice as long as last time).
I like the idea with a wiki. In the first iteration people from different projects that we consider here could first create some short stubs describing key aspects of their projects (features, assumptions, requirements, dependencies, etc). Then, in the following iterations we could try to come up with some readable structure for this. E.g. I think I could write something like this about Qubes OS to start with: * Category: Desktop OS (available as installable ISO) * Goal: reasonably secure multi-domain desktop environment with lots of mechanisms to make this as seamless experience to the user as possible. * Main focus on: 1) secure GUI, 2) secure inter-domain interaction mechanisms, 3) reasonable TCB decomposition (netvm, usbvm, etc) 4) domain management * Depends on: Xen, Fedora/Linux (VMs), Xorg * App compatibility: Most Linux Apps except for such that require accelerated graphics * Drivers compatibility: Essentially all supported by Linux kernel unless they break when run under Xen (some GPU drivers do :/) * Status: Qubes 1 released, Qubes 2 Beta 1 ISO in the work (with HVM and specifically Windows VM support, most code in the Git already). * Non-goals: creating a new microkernel (rather how to best use existing ones), creating drivers, creating new user apps. joanna.
Hi folks, sorry for my very long absence. On 10/30/2012 08:13 PM, Joanna Rutkowska wrote:
On 10/30/12 11:16, Martin Decky wrote:
Hi Joanna, hi folks,
So, perhaps during this meeting there could be a session which would aim to create such a big picture diagram or something.
I have to admit, to me this appears to be a bit contradictory to the idea of FOSDEM. I would like to focus on finding common problems, discussing different approaches to target them, learning from the experiences of other projects, identifying synergies. In my eyes, developing a taxonomy about: who is in competition to whom, and what are its differences, is more about creating an overview for potential customers of the projects, than discussing common technical issues of it.
That's a good idea. Last year there was a closing panel discussion on the microkernel devroom which might be a suitable place to organize such a "big diagram drawing" this time. Or would you prefer a separate session for it?
Anyway, we should perhaps brainstorm the interesting criteria according to we would like to classify the various systems on this mailing list first, so that the "big diagram drawing" is somehow structured when it happens live. Alternatively, I can host a wiki page for it (on the HelenOS wiki).
Therefore, in relation to Joanna's suggestion, I suggest to have a closing panel discussion again on the devroom. I also suggest to allocate a longer time slot for the panel discussion this time (at least twice as long as last time).
Although, I enjoyed this year's panel discussion, we're limited to one day (Saturday) with regard to the room. Moreover, there will hopefully be more active devroom members this time. At least, this is what I got signalled before submitting the devroom application. To give most of them the chance to present some work, I would reluctantly reduce the time for presentations. Of course, there will be the possibility to have informal discussion also on Sunday. My personal proposal is: having a "demo" slot, where all projects can have a laptop demonstration, or poster. We ourselves, or guests of the devroom can travel from table to table discussing key aspects of the projects. In my perception, it is a lot easier for most people to have a conversation, or ask their questions this way than having a podium, which always has a more formal atmosphere, whether it is intended or not.
I like the idea with a wiki. In the first iteration people from different projects that we consider here could first create some short stubs describing key aspects of their projects (features, assumptions, requirements, dependencies, etc). Then, in the following iterations we could try to come up with some readable structure for this.
E.g. I think I could write something like this about Qubes OS to start with:
* Category: Desktop OS (available as installable ISO) * Goal: reasonably secure multi-domain desktop environment with lots of mechanisms to make this as seamless experience to the user as possible. * Main focus on: 1) secure GUI, 2) secure inter-domain interaction mechanisms, 3) reasonable TCB decomposition (netvm, usbvm, etc) 4) domain management * Depends on: Xen, Fedora/Linux (VMs), Xorg * App compatibility: Most Linux Apps except for such that require accelerated graphics * Drivers compatibility: Essentially all supported by Linux kernel unless they break when run under Xen (some GPU drivers do :/) * Status: Qubes 1 released, Qubes 2 Beta 1 ISO in the work (with HVM and specifically Windows VM support, most code in the Git already). * Non-goals: creating a new microkernel (rather how to best use existing ones), creating drivers, creating new user apps.
Regardless of my personal objections, I don't want to choke your enthusiasm, nor overrule Joanna's proposal. Maybe, we wait for the final number of proposals and decide then, whether to develop such a diagram in an official time slot on Saturday, or do it informally maybe on Sunday? Here is the picture taking the same categories like above for Genode: * Category: OS Framework * Goal: framework to build OSes for special use-cases to a general purpose OS with particular attention to security * Main focus on: reducing the application-specific TCB, microkernel techniques with dynamic workload * Depends on: Linux | Fiasco.OC | NOVA | OKL4 | Pistachio | Fiasco | Codezero * App compatibility: POSIX compatibility layer (Noux) enables porting of Unix applications, Linux VM enables execution for unmodified Linux binaries * Drivers compatibility: different classes of Linux, OSS, or iPXE Device Drivers by corresponding compatibility layers: USB, Audio, Nic, Gallium * Status: Genode 12.11 (3 months release cycle) * Non-goals: reinvent the wheel for each subproblem (don't create new drivers, protocol stacks, or microkernels as long as usable exists) * Target Audience: system developers, not end users (folks like Joanna ;-)) Best regards Stefan -- Stefan Kalkowski Genode Labs http://www.genode-labs.com/ · http://genode.org/
Hello Stefan, with respect to your other email reminding us of the CFP deadline, there are still some talk proposals in the cooking from the HelenOS team. I hope we will post them in a few days.
I have to admit, to me this appears to be a bit contradictory to the idea of FOSDEM. I would like to focus on finding common problems, discussing different approaches to target them, learning from the experiences of other projects, identifying synergies.
I am sorry that I haven't set up the wiki for the taxonomy yet. The reason is that I really spent some time thinking about the intention and goal of the taxonomy. I still like the general idea of the taxonomy, but it is probably also necessary to suppress any promotional and competitive aspect of the comparison. FOSDEM should be really about cooperation and finding commonalities than competition and finding differences. I don't want to offend Joanna, but I believe that one of her reasons for proposing such a comparison is to promote Qubes OS as a mature and ready-to-use operating system -- in comparison to the other "toy and research microkernel projects" it sometimes gets confused with :-) The sarcasm is obviously mine, but I cannot help myself seeing this subtext in Joanna's original proposal. Please give me a few more days to think about the criteria again and set up the wiki. Thanks, Stefan, for sharing Genode's data, I'll put it in there as well.
My personal proposal is: having a "demo" slot, where all projects can have a laptop demonstration, or poster. We ourselves, or guests of the devroom can travel from table to table discussing key aspects of the projects. In my perception, it is a lot easier for most people to have a conversation, or ask their questions this way than having a podium, which always has a more formal atmosphere, whether it is intended or not.
The panel discussion has the advantage that you can compare the answers to the same questions from all the participating teams. But again, if you really try to avoid any hidden competitive messages, the demo slot is a viable alternative. Anyway, I hereby officially submit a proposal for a panel discussion slot. But feel free to eliminate it in favour of other proposals in the final decision. * title of your talk (will be printed in the FOSDEM booklet) Panel discussion * your full name (will be printed in the FOSDEM booklet) [The moderator of the panel discussion should be established yet.] * a short abstract A panel discussion with representatives of all the OS projects participating in the devroom. The general rule is that the moderator or someone from the audience asks a relevant question and each representative answers it. Discussing the taxonomy of the participating projects (as proposed by Joanna Rutkowska) might be also a part of the time slot. * duration of your talk (please, no longer than 45 minutes) 45 minutes M.D.
Hi all, apologies for the high cross-posting traffic. I left out the information on how to subscribe to the devroom's mailing list previously: https://lists.fosdem.org/listinfo/microkernel-devroom Please, limit the discussion regarding the devroom's organization, respectively your proposals to the above list instead of replying to all organizations in this mail-header. Thank you in advance Stefan On 29.10.2012 13:01, Stefan Kalkowski wrote:
FOSDEM 2013 - Microkernels / Component-based OSes devroom *CALL FOR PARTICIPATION* http://fosdem.org/2013
The developers of several free and open-source component- and/or microkernel-based operating systems will meet at FOSDEM 2013 in Brussels, Belgium and will share a developer room.
The devroom is currently looking for content in the form of talks related to the area of component- and/or microkernel-based operating systems. Possible topics include, but are not limited to:
* OS introduction to developers of other OS * Subsystems and architecture * Hardware and device drivers * Tools and languages * Release engineering and testing * Experience and learning from mistakes * Technical challenges * Community and life with an OS-project * Academia and education
Please send your talk proposal(s) no later than by 2012-12-15 to:
microkernel-devroom at lists.fosdem.org
Make sure to include the following in your proposal:
* title of your talk (will be printed in the FOSDEM booklet) * your full name (will be printed in the FOSDEM booklet) * a short abstract * duration of your talk (please, no longer than 45 minutes)
The final devroom schedule (along with accepted talks) will be announced on the above mailing list on 2012-12-22. Moreover, the speakers will be notified via e-mail. The schedule will be also published on the FOSDEM web and in the FOSDEM booklet after 2013-01-10.
If you do not want to give a talk yourself, you may still send suggestions for what else you would like to see, or do in the devroom. Please send your suggestions to the above mailing list.
The devroom is scheduled for Saturday of February 2. The seating capacity of the room is 74 seats. Any changes will be announced in the above mailing list.
-- Stefan Kalkowski Genode Labs http://www.genode-labs.com/ · http://genode.org/
Hi folks, sorry for bothering you again with this. I just want to remind you, there are only 12 days left until the deadline for the microkernel devroom proposals. On 10/29/2012 01:01 PM, Stefan Kalkowski wrote:
FOSDEM 2013 - Microkernels / Component-based OSes devroom *CALL FOR PARTICIPATION* http://fosdem.org/2013
The developers of several free and open-source component- and/or microkernel-based operating systems will meet at FOSDEM 2013 in Brussels, Belgium and will share a developer room.
The devroom is currently looking for content in the form of talks related to the area of component- and/or microkernel-based operating systems. Possible topics include, but are not limited to:
* OS introduction to developers of other OS * Subsystems and architecture * Hardware and device drivers * Tools and languages * Release engineering and testing * Experience and learning from mistakes * Technical challenges * Community and life with an OS-project * Academia and education
Please send your talk proposal(s) no later than by 2012-12-15 to:
microkernel-devroom at lists.fosdem.org
Make sure to include the following in your proposal:
* title of your talk (will be printed in the FOSDEM booklet) * your full name (will be printed in the FOSDEM booklet) * a short abstract * duration of your talk (please, no longer than 45 minutes)
The final devroom schedule (along with accepted talks) will be announced on the above mailing list on 2012-12-22. Moreover, the speakers will be notified via e-mail. The schedule will be also published on the FOSDEM web and in the FOSDEM booklet after 2013-01-10.
If you do not want to give a talk yourself, you may still send suggestions for what else you would like to see, or do in the devroom. Please send your suggestions to the above mailing list.
The devroom is scheduled for Saturday of February 2. The seating capacity of the room is 74 seats. Any changes will be announced in the above mailing list.
-- Stefan Kalkowski Genode Labs http://www.genode-labs.com/ · http://genode.org/
participants (3)
-
Joanna Rutkowska -
Martin Decky -
Stefan Kalkowski