Gerald Gutierrez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's not just about satisfying the requirements, it's also about
> understanding the characteristics of and supporting the applications to
> make it easy (or possible!) for them to do their jobs.
This may mean that the Hurd is not a good real-time OS. I don't know
if it ever will be. But it's goal is not "do well all the things person X
thinks other OS's do poorly."
> Yes, it's been in development for many years, but it is still fluid. It may
> not make sense for the Linux kernel to "change directions" now, but
> there aren't a lot of reasons why the Hurd cannot.
Yes there are. For one, it would require rewriting so much, that it
would be a different project. In that case, it's better to just start
a different project. For another, real-time issues don't interest me
or the other core developers much.
