On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 03:07:55PM +0000, Wilmer van der Gaast wrote: > Jeroen Dekkers@lists.debian-devel@Fri, 29 Mar 2002 14:19:36 +0100: > > Linux is a pretty good kernel, for the thing it's written for. [..] > > But with portability it doesn't score well. > > > So, go ahead and port the Hurd to more than fifteen architectures. At > the moment the single architecture it can run on is not quite my > favourite.. You don't have to port the Hurd, there isn't any arch-specific code in the Hurd. The only thing you've to do is port glibc (just add a few files for that architecture) and port the underlying microkernel. The PowerPC port is already working (using the OSF Mach). The only changed to the Hurd code were the GNU Mach vs OSF Mach things and now the Hurd runs on both. That means it will also run on HP PA-RISC. Without any changes to the Hurd code, that's *portability*. > It happens quite often that a project does more than it was meant to in > the beginning. That's good.. And at the moment Hurd seems to be some > sort of vapourware. It's in no way ready to replace Linux, and all the > Hurd people say is "just you wait, in a year we will be laughing about > you all" or "we'll merge with L4 soon and then we will be a performance > monster", but I've seen nothing yet. Merge? You mean porting. We are going to make the Hurd run on L4. We aren't going to merge anything (except maybe manpower ;-). And if the Hurd runs on L4, it will run on all architectures (including SMP machines) supported by L4. No need to do a special port of the Hurd to another processor. ;-) > Stop all these discussions then, > and spend more time on hacking. And come back to us in a year, when the > system *is* ready for world domination. We don't want world domination. We want world liberation. Jeroen Dekkers -- Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org IRC: jeroen@openprojects
Attachment:
pgpY7pSPmtdHH.pgp
Description: PGP signature