Alfred, At Tue, 25 Oct 2005 10:09:39 +0200, Alfred M Szmidt wrote: > You obviously don't get it, the core of the GNU system is not the > Hurd. The Hurd must tie into the rest ot the core GNU system which > usually consists of quite alot (coreutils--implements POSIX bits, > glibc--implements POSIX bits, bash--implements POSIX bits).
I don't know what the Hurd must or must not, but I know two things: This is not for you alone to decide, and it is premature to say if what we are doing here will satisfy all requirements the Hurd must satisfy or not. In other words, keep your side sweeps at home, they are uncalled for and we don't take them from you anyway. What absolutely and totally doesn't work is to try to impose a thinking prohibition on us just because of some self-proclaimed restrictions on the Hurd design goals. We will try to envision the best system we can build, and _then_ we will see what the consequences are. _If_ the consequences will be that it cannot be used for GNU, _then_ (and only then) we will examine the reasons for this and see if there are fundamental incompatibilities, or if it is just an engineering problem. Note that I don't expect any problems of this sort. In fact, the POSIX compatibility layer part of the design is pretty easy to understand and there is sufficient precedence, including the Hurd on Mach, to believe that it can be pulled off. This is currently not under discussion, just because it is the easy part, and we are right now struggeling with the hard, non-POSIX, parts. If you are only interested in the POSIX parts, then this is a strong signal for you to stay out of the way. If you have troubles understanding the design, or see some problems implementing it, then you are welcome to ask technical questions about it. Thanks, Marcus _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
