> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 4:08 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi,
> This is grossly oversimplyfied IMHO. While I wouldn't say that it is > factually wrong, it is sure to cause serious misunderstanding. The bottom line is Coyotos was (and is) rejected as a kernel for Hurd , no matter what reason . Right or wrong ? > It's not only that Coyotos can support non-trivial confinement. The real > problem is that its whole design relies and is optimized for this > feature; which makes it effectively impossible to create any different > system on top of it... So again, we are stuck with "no kernel" for Hurd ? -- http://uttre.wordpress.com/2008/05/14/the-lost-love-of-mine/
