Re: HURD/Linux/BSD* ... Loosing focus.
On Mon, 2002-05-20 at 06:51, Michael Stone wrote:
> Quite the opposite. I worry that debian/hurd will be gratuitously
> different from debian/linux in places where it doesn't have to be.
Except that, later, you say:
> No, please don't, because your examples are misguided. I don't believe
> that I've heard any serious suggestion that hurd should be forced to
> have a /proc.
Wouldn't that be a "gratuitous difference" between Linux and HURD? (And
BSD?). Perhaps /proc should be moved; maybe we should create
/lib/kernel/proc or /var/spool/proc or something.
Arguments for /proc are exactly like arguments for /hurd, with one
difference: Linux has had political pull and historic precedent to get
its exceptions canonized; HURD, as an unreleased OS, has not.
So, the proper question is not whether there is a technical reason to
change the Linux-biased standard. Rather, we should ask whether we will
allow the HURD to develop without artificial non-technical pressures
from "legacy" systems, and perhaps allow our definition of "what is
Debian" to be altered to accomodate the new ideas it brings.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: