[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

RE: Request for better GnuMach/Hurd Information


I think that the constant lack of any current information regarding the
hurd, and the inaccesability of recent hurd source archives is detrimental
to the project as a whole.

I suspect that most people assume that the hurd is either dead or being
developed so slowly that it will never be finished, and consequently ignore
it as an option entirely. I know I did for a long time.

With the 'bazaar' development style being the latest fad, its notable that
the hurd development has always been very closed. I understand this to some
extent, since it creates a more organized and (potentially) solid
development model.

I don't think packaging the gnu-0.2 release is at all worth packaging.
However I don't think that is our aim. I thought it was clear that we will
work with more recent snapshots which Gord will make available (am I
missinterpreting your prior statements to this effect?).

Also, having the only acces to recent code be through a prorietary and
generally costly (server wise anyway) distributed filesystem like andrew is
shocking considering the nature of this project.

Bottom line, I've given up on the hurd more than once because of inability
to get any support or frequent source updates, I'm sure there are many
others of the "kernel snapshot every 6 hours", "anonymous cvs access to
everything" linux generation have and will do the same.

Anybody else?

[ james . taylor ] . [ jptaylor @ aisvt . bfg . com ]

| -----Original Message-----
| From: Fulgham, Brent/SCO [mailto:BFulgham@CH2M.com]
| Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 1998 2:33 PM
| To: debian-hurd@lists.debian.org
| Subject: Request for better GnuMach/Hurd Information
| I would like to make a public request that the hurd development team
| provide better access to their mailing list archives and their current
| development state.  I'm posting it here (debian-hurd) first to solicit
| feedback from the other Debian volunteers as to whether this is
| appropriate or not.
| I have visited their "development" directory and their "current" mailing
| list archives, and find that both are stagnant as of 8 months ago (for
| the mailing lists) and about 3 months ago (for the hurd/gnumach ftp
| site).
| We are told that development has continued "at a private server", but we
| aren't given access to any of this.  If we are going to produce a hurd
| distribution, I would like to be working from the latest patched
| version.  If all they want is a debianized distribution of the gnu-0.2
| archive, we can do that.  However, I feel like it's a waste of time.
| Based on my experience (minimal) using the hurd distribution, there are
| serious performance and stability issues.  I realize that this is a
| relatively new kernel, and that some leeway is warranted, but there are
| non-trivial issues with port-leaking that made it impossible (at least
| for me) to compile ncurses (a fairly small library) natively under
| gnu-0.2.  Perhaps some of these things have been fixed in the current
| release, but I can't get the contents of Gord's GHHK disks to work with
| the gnu-0.2 distribution and so I can't tell.
| I am starting to question whether the hurd, in the gnu-0.2 state, is
| worth packaging.  Most people wishing to use a packaged binary
| distribution will be expecting more stability than I am currently
| experiencing.  I think that with current snapshots we might see some
| better resource handling.
| Does anyone else have comments on this?
| Thanks,
| -Brent
| --
| To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-request@lists.debian.org
| with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
| listmaster@lists.debian.org

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: