RE: Hurd Advocacy?
> Shawn Boyette <mdxi@collapsar.net> writes:
>
> > This is exactly the conclusion I reached a few days ago when I read
> > about L4 through Debian Weekly News. I keep wanting to play with the
> > HURD, but it keeps on not existing. This is almost farsical,
> > announcing a switch to a new kernel architecture (which, I
> might add,
> > is already deprecated by its developers -- Pistachio is the current
> > branch of L4Ka, not Hazelnut) before the previous new kernel
> > architecture (OSKit) migration is even completed.
>
> L4-Hurd will run on Pistachio. I think the person who wrote the
> article (or whatever it was) made a mistake.
>
> > Is this a project to produce a kernel for a GNU OS, or is
> it some sort
> > of never-ending, ivory tower, trans-academic wankfest for kernel
> > geeks? Can you imagine where GNU would be if gcc and emacs had been
> > produced this way?
>
> I don't agree with the image you create. The Hurd is not an ivory
> tower.
>
> --
> Marco
>
>
Shawn,
While I moderately understand your sentiment, in the fact that there is a
lot of design and theory behind Hurd, I have to agree with Marco for one
main reason. There is actually very little kernel development taking place
in the Hurd itself. L4 is being developed by another group, GNUMach 1.x is
dead, and very little if any work is being done on GNUMach 2.x. :-)
Barry deFreese
Technology Services Manager
Nike Team Sports
(949)-616-4005
Barry.deFreese@nike.com
--
"Technology doesn't make you less stupid; it just makes you stupid faster."
Jerry Gregoire - Former CIO at Dell
Reply to: