Hello, On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 02:23:00AM +0100, [email protected] wrote: > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 08:23:57AM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > > > And I think I can remember somebody from the Hurd community having > > tried to show the advantage of the Hurd way and ran into an attitude > > like: ``Why do we need a Hurd, if we already have FUSE?'' :-( > > Indeed this is a problem -- translators were the most visible advantage > of the Hurd archtecture; and now that FUSE covers most of the obvious > use cases, it's much harder to sell then before... > > In my latest Hurd talk, I didn't even try presenting translators as a > feature on its own. Rather, I just explained them as an element of the > extensible VFS concept -- which is part of the Hurd's fundamental idea > of a user-extensible system environment. (And the one I covered in most > detail of course, as it's the most evident part, with the most examples > available.)
Hm, this is a good idea. I guess I'll borrow this idea from you when I'll be delivering some Hurd-related presentation at my University (if you don't mind, of course). Though. unfourtunately, I haven't yet run into an audience who know for sure what a kernel is, to tell nothing about FUSE or translators :-) Regards, scolobb
