>> Is kernel threads something envisionned for the "near" future of Minix?
> I'm afraid not. ../.. The benefits are not so clear.
True. Just curious.
> This can mean various things.
Yes, it does not require kernel threading support.
> For example, libmthread already implements a
> large subset of the pthreads API/standard,
I might be wrong, but I understood it did not support pre-emption,
only cooperative multithreading.
Does libmthread support pre-emption ?
>> * lightweight libC library - Musl could be a nice candidate for example
> Hmm, I thought the netbsd libc wasn't very heavyweight to begin with?
Well, on ARM a stripped, statically linked version, of
weights 315 KiB ...
It is definitely not GNU libc, but still heavy.
musl is supposed to be much lighter (I have not tested it on Minix :-)):
A non-trivial embedded system is likely to require "some" storage
space, especially if you need to have multiple concurrent processes
(vs. threads) and without dynamic lib support...
This is probably not a big issue with BeagleBoards, new RPis, etc. but
on devices that embed RAM & Flash in the 10's MiB range, this could be
a show stopper.
A full Minix system is more in the 100's MiB range, but the Minix
"core" (kernel, system servers/fs, ...) could be used on smaller