[cap-talk] A Taxonomy of Current Object-Cap Systems
toby.murray at comlab.ox.ac.uk
Fri Mar 6 03:45:27 EST 2009
On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 14:10 -0800, Charles Landau wrote:
> Toby Murray wrote:
> > The current systems included in the taxonomy are:
> > EROS/CapROS
> EROS and CaPROS are two different systems and should be listed
> separately. The CapROS implementation has diverged significantly from
> EROS, and the design has also to a lesser extent.
Thanks for that. Can you tell me whether EROS still runs? Could you also
have a look at the current taxonomy
tell me whether CapROS deviates from EROS in any of the items listed
(which are all defined in bullet points after the table.) Is there some
CapROS documentation I can point to to justify assertions that are made
about it in the table? (Ideally, I'd like to provide a reference to
back-up every claim that it makes for all systems there.)
> Bill Frantz wrote:
> > toby.murray at comlab.ox.ac.uk (Toby Murray) on Wednesday, March 4, 2009 wrote:
> >> >Notable omissions therefore include KeyKOS and
> >> >(D)CCS (the first object-capability OSes) and Gedanken (the first
> >> >object-capability language).
> > I believe that a direct descendent of KeyKOS was released by Agorics (RIP)
> > under an open source license. Every time I try to give it a name, I get
> > told, "Oh no, that's not the name. That name has IP problems."
> Whatever the name, it's at http://www.cap-lore.com/CapTheory/KK/Apridos/.
> It runs on a computer that's no longer for sale (if it ever was), but if
> someone has one, they could run it.
> The S/370 version of KeyKOS will run on a S/370 emulator (there's one
> for the PC). It's proprietary, but the owners of the code could write
> code for it today. I'd argue for its inclusion.
Good. If you tell me how these fit into the taxonomy I'll certainly
More information about the cap-talk