Re: hurd does NOT need /hurd
On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 04:08:31PM +0200, SpyderMan wrote:
> Ok, you got me lost here. (I've been trying to follow the reasoned
> arguements (and the others :) ) from both sides - honest :) )
> Somebody (Jeroen IIRC) saying that dozens or more distros of GNU/Hurd
> (or whatever) was not the way to go, and here you are saying debian
> gnu/hurd is not gnu/hurd.
Sorry, I meant GNU Hurd (without a slash, I was confused). I mean
the official GNU Hurd source tree, which does exist, and it is
completely outside of Debians control.
But just like it is done with other GNU packages, Debian can add patches
to it, and I frequently do. Those patches are usually of mediocre
quality or don't go in the right direction of the system's design.
They exist solely to add a feature urgently needed, or they are
> I take it from what you write here that Debian GNU/Hurd is not the
> 'official' version, simply a distro of an official version. Where is
> this official version? CVS? alpha.gnu.org?
Debian GNU/Hurd is right now the only binary distribution of the
GNU/Hurd system. But I was talking about the GNU Hurd project,
which is a GNU project on savannah. Sorry about the confusion.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org