you're mixing having an idea of how the OS works (ie: conceptual/high level) to having working knowledge and being able to hack into the OS when needed. I know this may sound like moving the goal posts, but it really does not help me that I know conceptually that there is a file system if I don't work with it directly and/or know how to debug issues that arise from it.
> having working knowledge and being able to hack into the OS when needed.
I'm going to parrot the GP: "That's what I expect from someone who graduated from a serious CS/Engineering program."
I know there are a lot of really bad CS programs in the US, but some experience implementing OS components in a System course so that they can "hack into the OS when needed" is exactly what I would expect out of a graduate from a good CS program.
I think your expectations are out of alignment with what's happening. I know software engineers who graduated with CS degrees from schools like MIT, Urbana Champaigne, and Stanford who took Operating System classes but could not realistically "hack into the OS". If those programs aren't consistently imparting that knowledge to students without an explicit interest, I don't see how others can be expected to...
> I know software engineers who graduated with CS degrees from schools like MIT, Urbana Champaigne, and Stanford who took Operating System classes but could not realistically "hack into the OS".
"into" was quoting an earlier poster and hasty typos abound :)
The discussion centers on the following expectation of graduates from strong CS programs.
> having working knowledge and being able to hack into the OS when needed.
Now, the course from the listed schools may prepare some students, but I am simply reporting that I have met numerous graduates who state very explicitly.
- they are not comfortable with a variety of operating system concepts
- they are not comfortable interacting with operating systems in any depth
I don't have a big diverse data set, but the impression given is that if you expect this level of expertise you will be disappointed regularly. If the strongest CS programs pre-selecting for smart and driven students can't reliably impart that skillset, why would I expect other schools to?
IDK, I think the convo is hard to have without explicit goalposts.
For context, the original quote was:
* > How about understand the OS internals? How about write a compiler? How about write a library for their fav language? How about actually troubleshoot a misbehaving nix process?
Writing a compiler, writing a library for their fav language, and troubleshoot a misbehaving nix process are all examples of things I would definitely expect a CS major to have done at some point.
A SoTA compiler for Rust or whatever? Ok, no. But, you know, a compiler.
Ditto for library -- better than the standard lib? Ok, no. But, you know, a standard lib that's good enough.
ditto for debugging nix processes. Not world-class hacker, just, you know, capable of debugging a process.
I guess the other examples in that quote seem to suggest that "OS internals" probably means something like "knowledge at the level of a typical good OS course".
And who knows what those people meant by "comfortable interacting with operating systems in any depth". There could also be some reverse D-K effect going on here... "I got a B- in CMU's OS course" still puts you very well into the category of "understand the OS internals", IMO.
