Re: Linux/Hurd compatibility
On Mon, May 10, 1999 at 01:35:20AM -0400, David Waite wrote:
> > I would tend to call non-portability a bug.
> Unfortunately non-portability is a bug that the programmer usually can't
> test (as they only have one system). =)
But hey, what's free software for? :)
> This would be what I would vote for. I feel that both /dev and /proc really
> aren't that great, /proc is nice for users but things move and change format
> so often that it breaks all sorts of programs.
The trouble is that /proc is inconsistent even within itself (file formats
and the like). However, the only programs that use /proc tend to be
reasonably system-specific anyway, and could certainly be improved on a
GNU/Hurd system. I'd like a "top" that's more like OpenBSD's systat program.
> [...] I think that the Hurd project (I try not to say we* since all I have
> *done so far is planned to write code, not contribute anything) needs to
> get more developers and to get things like PPP working before this is an
> option.
Well, yes; it probably would make sense to have something to ship before we
start shipping. :) Why is ppp support taking such as long time? Perhaps it
would make sense to implement the simpler SLIP protocol first?
--
Adam Sampson
azz@josstix.demon.co.uk
Reply to: