Debate.

My argument: APP

Kernel, duh.

Reference: http://kernel.org/

watch video duh

PSP applications have full access to the hardware. The bootloader unloads the PSP OS and bootloads Ubuntu. Good try, though.

Kerm, not they don't. They're restricted to user mode which prevents the use of plugins, ME accelerated audio, and other important crap I'm not gonna bother mentioning. ESPECIALLY on the 3000 model where Sony corrected a flaw that allowed CFW's to patch the flash. Now, CFW's can only patch from RAM and can only enable a few kernel-mode features.

On the PC, there's Loadlin, which is an application that lets you boot Linux from DOS. Since you know x86 assembly, you can read the source and understand exactly what it does.

You'll find out that it's a KERNEL, not an application, just like booting Windows.

psp kernel developement is impossible, and any idiot would know you can't emulate a pc on a psp. this means that Linux has no choice but to make calls to CFW libraries, which makes this version of Linux rely on other software, which make is app, not kernel.

It's probably a cooperative virtual machine.

ONLY IRRATIONAL POINTS AND EXTREME SARCASM ARE PERMITTED

NO DEBATES ARE PERMITTED ON THUS FORUM EVER. THUS SAITH THE ADMIN.

Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel I don't know what else to say, except you're wrong and there's nothing to debate here.

UGH YOU'RE SO WRONG WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT WE NEVER HAD THOSE KEYS ELF DUH ELF DUHHHHH.

Now, first off, if Linus Torvalds says that Linux is a kernel, it's a kernel.

Secondly, if you actually watched that video, you will see that the PSP has a homebrew launcher in it. It allows you to start an emulator and run other kernels in user mode. If it was a stand-alone app, then you wouldn't need an emulator. A kernel is still a kernel, whether you run it on real hardware or in an emulator.

Details may have issues, but that's what I got from reading the half-byte loader and how it is able to start a linux kernel.

/thread.

I hate to counteract Mr. Elfprince, since we usually try to moderate as a team. But I disagree with locking this thread. I believe there's additional INTELLIGENT RATIONAL (/me glares at Nikky) debate to be had.

Apologies, I thought all of the necessary things had been said.

Uh, yes you can. You can even emulate x86 if you really wanted to.

Then again, only an idiot would think Linux was an app or that there was even a debate whether or not it is an app or a kernel.

look, my major point here is this:

* Linux is capable of running without a bootloader

* Linux is capable of depending (or at least being semi-dependent) on existing libraries

* It is not selective to a particular console(s)

* Though in most cases Linux runs on a low level, defining it as a kernel, there are some ports which do not. For example; as a PSP developer, I know that making a kernel for PSP is impossible as the kernel-mode EBOOT signing keys have yet to be discovered. In 1000 and 2000 models of PSP, the enabling of homebrew applications is done by using an exploit to patch a module located in flash0 and install additional modules in the same location, which allows user mode applications to access kernel mode functions. However, in the 3000 model of PSP, Sony fixed the exploit so that only kernel mode EBOOTs can write to flash. So, in those models homebrew enabling is done by patching a particular area in RAM, so the built in modules don't exist. To make up for this downfall, the pspsdk was modified so that the user's applications would be dynamically linked into the EBOOT itself. Now, the ONLY way to call kernel functions is to the kernel bridge exploit to execute code from a kernel mode PRX module that can't access any memory outside of its address space. Summing it up, though it is possible to emulate a pc on a psp, it is not possible to emulate ALL of the features of a pc on a psp. Linux would have no access to ME accelerated audio, memory access for flash0/flash1/flash2/umd, while running within the emulator. Additionally, the kernel would run freakishly slow unless it had direct access to SCE graphics functions since rendering unswizzled images to the screen reduces the framerate by about 75-80% (averaging about 60 fps without swizzling and 400+fps with swizzling and 600+fps if you also take advantage of offscreen memory). Altogether, my point is that somehow the Linux running in the video above has to somehow be accessing kernel mode functions.


In (for the love of god notice these words--->) MY OPINION, Linux can be considered as an application; a shell like DoorsCS.

EDIT:

Appending on; the video clearly shows that the guy didn't run dosbox/bochs/whatever and that Ubunto called the PSP's built-in osk and dialog routines. Proof that it's using psp libraries.

Point 1, yes, it can run without a bootloader. The only case I have seen that is when the kernel is a bootloader for itself. (Some small dev boards do this)

Point 2, my 10 cents agrees.

Point 3, official, no. It has a limited amount of architectures that it will run on. Modified versions of the kernel can be run on more hardware. This still remains true on the PSP as it is running in an emulated environment.

Point 4, please, please, read what the video showed! The PSP was running an emulator. From HBL:
Now, on to what App means...
Now on to what a kernel is
The Linux kernel does nothing on its own. It you just put the kernel on a computer and nothing else, not much will happen. Apps are included running under the kernel. Now the PSP is creating a virtual computer with a virtual address space and hardware. The kernel works in a virtual space and still is a kernel because the kernel isn't executing on its own, it is being helped by the emulator and relies on other applications running under it running in the emulator.

[quote="AHelper"]Point 4, please, please, read what the video showed! The PSP was running an emulator. From HBL:
It means run homebrew emulators such as DaedalusX64, Homers Rin, and VisualBoy Advance, not actually play those games. HBL is just one of 500 homebrew enablers for the PSP, and again I state that the guy didn't go through dosbox, bochs, whatever. He clicked on Linux and Linux popped up. The end.

Already cleared this up with the preview comment.

You're saying that because there's one instance where Linux cannot be totally ported in an intact state to a certain, proprietary machine, then Linux can't be a kernel. If I run a flavor of Linux in VirtualBox, am I actually running a Linux kernel, or not?

To quote AHelpers definition,


There's a virtual machine with virtual hardware. The Linux kernel is sitting between its own apps and the virtual hardware. I fail to see how this isn't the behavior of a kernel.