On Tue, 03 Apr 2001 07:32:00 Ognyan Kulev wrote: > On Mon, Apr 02, 2001 at 08:03:15PM +0100, Bob Ham wrote: > > Hi all > > > > I've a few quesitons about the Hurd that I was hoping could have some > > light shed on them: firstly, has any thought been put into how sound > > will be handled? If not, does anybody know if it would be possible to > > port OSS/Lite or ALSA to the Hurd? > > AFAIK There isn't any code for sound yet. If you have desire you can write > a sound layer and send patches for GNUMach and/or Hurd to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quite obviously there is no sound code. This is not what I was asking. What I was asking is whether or not there had been any discussion on a sound layer and whether any developers had given any thought to how the Hurd should handle a sound layer. It looks as though this is not the case. > > Is there going to be a Hurd TCP/IP stack developed? I know pfinet was > > carved out of Linux, and there's a 'newpfinet' directory in the hurd CVS > > repository (even though it's empty.) > > pfinet is TCP/IP stack, isn't it? Yes. However, it was developed for Linux and not the Hurd (or am I gravely mistaken?) This means that (amongst other things) what looks like all of linux/include is included with the Hurd sources and so I'd imagine there will be code that enables the Linux shaped block to fit into a Hurd shaped hole. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd imagine this is not a Good Thing. > But it is tightly integrated with > ethernet layer, e.g. there is no PPP support yet. I don't know what the > plans for newpfinet are. > > > Has anyone looked at GGI's KGI kernel drivers (ie, what fb came from)? I > > would imagine that the Mach environment would be ideal to host graphics > > drivers (as opposed to a monolithic kernel.) Or, are people happy with > > X? > > GGI was mentioned in mailing lists a time ago with the same in mind: as an > alternative of X. Again, if you like to implement it in GNUMach/Hurd you > are welcome. BTW X is so popular! But I agree that it's so heavy too. And > why GNUMach as microkernel to be ideal for hosting graphics drivers? See Niels M�ller's comments. Also, having a graphics driver is not the same as replacing X. You could run an X server that uses a Hurd graphics translator. This is kind of thing KGI/fb with the fb X server does. However, there is also the Berlin project whose aim *is* to replace X. Berlin seems to me to be a better choice for a GUI for GNU than X. I say this as everybody knows X is a *big* beast with lots of issues, both technical and otherwise (X license stuff.) Combined with the suitablity of the Hurd for a KGI style graphics system and Berlin's use of GGI (and hence KGI), this seems to me to be a very powerful arguement. Bob -- Bob Ham: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pkl.net/~node/ IRC: 'node' on irc.openprojects.net: #slashdot ICQ: 4396425 'node' "The GNU philosophy is about freedom. To be free one must have personal power. Personal power is an individual thing, difficult to obtain and quick to perish." --Krisno Pryosusilo
