Yes, Hurd reached for a platonic ideal and good for them but it wasn't a very practical approach.
I'd like to see some backup for the claim that the Hurd isn't a very practical approach. I know for a fact that the hurd is actually very practical. Meanwhile, please estimate what it takes to port a file system written to the hurd interfaces to Linux. Not much, most of the code for file-systems tend to be similar. The same goes for drivers. The lower end tends to be quite different so that a 1:1 port isn't possible. And in the case with Linux, its internal API changes all the time without a single thought. I.e. the logic is the same, the implementation differs. > You might want to look at: > http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd-paper.html . You might also want to look at BSD union directories. Already supported by the Hurd, and not in kernel space, but a seperate translator. Also used as the basis for the package manager. :-) _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
