Re: window manager.

[Mauro Sanna <mauro.sanna@comune.cagliari.it>]

> Hurd is not a kernel, mach is the uKernel over which hurd runs, and
> debian is in top of hurd, :).  I have it for trial.  Console is OK,
> but with X I experienced file system corruption.  In general it's OK,
> but I wouldn't trust it reliably.  That's just my opinion though.
> Remember the whole hurd is under unstable, and what's not under
> unstable is under experimental.  So for sure for reliable server it's
> NOT good enough.  Besides mach is pretty picky about hardware
> compatibility, :(  But it works, and it's what matters to me (I just
> want to be ready for the time hurd gets into a more reliable state,
> and it gets more packages in, besides more drivers since most are
> missing).  Maybe more usage from others could help get it more
> stable,
>
> :).  Hurd guys are to change the uKernel from mach to L4, and now
> : they
>
> are thinking about coyotos and another new version of L4 uKernels. 
> So all this makes hurd a bit far from what I'd like it to be, but
> again, it's usable, specially if you want a trial system plus if you
> want to contribute a bit as well, :)

Ok.
But.......why using hurd with mach kernel instead of linux?
It's for your trial ok, but supposing hurd became stable, why use it 
instead of linux?