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

Re: hurd does NOT need /hurd



On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 01:56:05AM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 06:28:59PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> > First, some problems about /hurd that have come up on irc just now.
> > 
> > 1) is /hurd versioned?  Or is /hurd a 'special' filesystem(kinda like devfs
> >    for linux), that lists the available services that have been compiled into
> >    the kernel?
> 
> Have you read my mail in response to Joey Hess?  I don't know what you
> discussed on IRC, but /hurd is a directory.  It contains programs.  You
> could also ask if /bin is versioned.

/lib/modules is versioned

> The Hurd servers in /hurd indeed usualy conform to the Hurd server interface
                                   ^^^^^^
> as defined by /include/hurd/*.defs.  This interface is _stable_.  There is
> no need to version the binary interface as it is not allowed to change.
                                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Make up your mind.

This sort of lack of foresight is what makes ABI transitions so
painful. Didn't people learn ANYTHING when changing from libc5 to
libc6?

> > In the current FHS, there is documentation about /lib/modules.
> 
> Linux modules are not even remotely comparable to Hurd servers.  Linux
> modules are comparable to other binary plugins that are dynamically loaded
> and unloaded at run time by some programs that support plugins.

Linux modules provide mappings between one type of device and
another. Hurd "servers" do the same. The difference is one of
implementation, not of purpose. Take the lp module as an example. If
you feel there are still some differences, I invite you to describe
exactly how a hurd implementation of the lp functionality would differ
from the one used on linux.

> > It's just that linux doesn't have a well-defined way of having translators run
> > as normal users(most run as root, or something).
> 
> Linux has no way to run arbitrary translators by untrusted users.  It
> completely lacks the security concepts required to make it feasible.

You missed the user-space nfsd/cfs/sfs/autofs examples, then, I
see. I'm sure the authors would be interested to know that what they
are doing isn't possible.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
 `. `'                          | Imperial College,
   `-             -><-          | London, UK

Attachment: pgpkJrfLeUsQI.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: