> I've been lurking around this list for a while. I've been very impressed > by the dedication individuals can show without any (immediate) monetary > incentive to propel them. > > I was hoping that one of my simple (naive) questions would be answered: > > Why was the decision made to provide such extensive compatibility with > Linux? Other than the time factor is there any other reason why > programs/functionality are being ported from Linux to the Hurd.
... Because the software is available ... ... Because this (easily arguable) provides the ability to run a whole lot of software on Hurd with minimal outlay of development effort ... ... Because this provides opportunity for the GNU Project to more formally benefit from software created putatively "for Linux" (without regard to "GNU.") ... Is there some particular reason why you would think it preferable to *not* attempt some degree of compatibility? -- Christopher B. Browne, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne SAP Basis Consultant, UNIX Guy Windows NT - How to make a 100 MIPS Linux workstation perform like an 8 MHz 286
