Re: [dionv@spots.ab.ca: Should I continue to study linux-based GNU?]
On Thu, 28 Oct 1999 09:59:10 EDT, the world broke into rejoicing as
John Tobey <jtobey@john-edwin-tobey.org> said:
> > > b) Is there some compelling purpose that Hurd can serve that Linux
> > > inherently *cannot?*
> >
> > I do not think so. It is just the cleaner design, but that is only of
> > interest to those who want to hack it.
>
> It is enough for a feature to be so much easier to do on Hurd that no
> one will bother getting it into Linux.
>
> I imagine an Internet hosting service could offer the equivalent of a
> dedicated server as a sub-Hurd, so the customer can do the things that
> only root can do on Unix, but several customers could safely share a
> machine. Can VMWare do that already? (i.e. completely protect the
> hardware and other VMs from each other)
>
> Also, I think the possible uses for filesystem translators are
> inexhaustible. I'm hoping to write the glue that will allow writing
> ad hoc translators in Perl with minimal effort.
I would suppose that for the "balance" to shift in Hurd's direction,
there needs to be a combination of both:
a) Hurd being "adequate" for those that use Linux; e.g. - you're
able to run a large proportion of the sorts of stuff that runs on
Debian with Hurd, and
b) Some downright *advantage* to using Hurd. It's going to be
applications that can be built *using* fs translators that would
be the "killer application," not necessarily the translator
ability itself...
--
"It's a pretty rare beginner who isn't clueless. If beginners weren't
clueless, the infamous Unix learning cliff wouldn't be a problem."
-- david parsons
cbbrowne@ntlug.org- <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
Reply to: