[IgorPartola]

While I love the story, it's really amusing to watch how it gets re-discovered on HN every few years, blows everyone's minds, and then gets quoted all over the place, even where it is only mildly relevant. This might be our "does glass flow" meme.

[chris_wot]

Seemed relevant to me. The question asked about compilers and the kernel is what compiled the compiler. Ken Thompsons' talk related to hiding code by adding code to a compiler then compile the compiler, remove the code then continue to compile the compiler with the modified version that doesn't have the source code - your modification remains.

Point being: both relate to compiling compilers.

[dllthomas]

> the kernel is what compiled the compiler

That's not what a kernel does...

[chris_wot]

Who are you quoting? Certainly wasn't me!

[dllthomas]

Uh, it was the parent comment - do a search if you can't find it on perusal. It's possibly taken out of context but I don't see a reading of the passage in question that doesn't include that sentiment. Could you clarify?

[chris_wot]

The parent comment? I was the top level commenter on this. Do you mean the article itself? It reads:

"The kernel is written in C, however how did the kernel get compiled without a compiler installed?"

And...

"If the C compiler is installed on my machine before the kernel is compiled, how can the compiler itself get compiled without a compiler installed?"