* Robert Millan writes: > On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 01:31:02PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: >> >> The problem with any name you make up is that you made it up, and people >> won't know it. So you have to explain it anyway. >> >> Depending on who you ask, you will get different answers. Some people thing >> it covers what the operating system does. Some what the kernel does. >> >> You can say kernel-replacement if you mean the Unix kernel specifically, but >> this also is only true in conjunction with the C library. I am not sure, >> but I guess names will come up as soon as more people start to talk about >> it. Hopefully at some point people will get so accustomed to the idea that >> system code is user code that they will be happy to talk in terms of >> individual components, eg filesystem, process management, authentication.
> very interesting. you mean like, *fs, proc and auth will be treated as > separate components of the system? maybe there could be a package for > each, so they can be handled/upgraded separately. does that technicaly > make sense? They are already separate components of the system. The official Hurd package will contain the "official" versions of each such translator. A user may write their own replacement for such translators. I think it would be quite annoying to have to upgrade each translator manually like that. -- Alfred M. Szmidt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
