Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Nanokernel is smaller, picokernel is the smallest.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
On Saturday, December 7, 2019 7:01:42 AM EET microsoft gaofei wrote: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exokernel . Do you think exokernel is much > better than microkernel? Or would you make a nanokernel instead of > microkernel? Exokernel isn't good concept. 14 years ago I was attended to test a few ones, so, microkernel is a best one. btw, if youäre interested in more info, contact me personally. thanks, -- Alexander Vdolainen, The evil contractor.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Decade ago, I've been trying to learn and hack exokernel. However, I stopped finally. Because I'm a kind of pragmatism guy. Microkernel is mature in commercial world. If we want to help GNU operating system for real cases, microkernel would be the way. GNU is a project for advocating free software to common people. GNU is not a reserach institue after all. Well, just my personal opinion. Everyone can try exokernel for GNU or other GPL compatible licenses. Best regards. microsoft gaofei writes: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exokernel . Do you think exokernel is much > better than microkernel? Or would you make a nanokernel instead of > microkernel? -- GNU Powered it GPL Protected it GOD Blessed it HFG - NalaGinrut Fingerprint F53B 4C56 95B5 E4D5 6093 4324 8469 6772 846A 0058 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exokernel . Do you think exokernel is much better than microkernel? Or would you make a nanokernel instead of microkernel?
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
There are more kernel types, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exokernel . Moreover, some DRMs are free software, because their full name is Direct Rendering Manager, some things have the same initialism.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Le jeudi 28 novembre 2019, 06:00:32 CET Jean Louis a écrit : > For Microsoft I judge by previous pattern, fur example using GNU system > in Windows and never calling it neither GNU neither putting attention > to free software. Apple and many other proprietary operating systems (including Ubuntu, which is not mostly proprietary) do that too. That’s unfortunately pretty common.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] This isn't really the right place to discuss out opinions of Microsoft. -- Dr Richard Stallman Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > Please forgive my ignorance, but what's wrong exactly in licensing > under only a single version of the GPL? That creates a license incompatibility. GPL 2 and GPL 3 are incompatible licenses. For instance, suppose you want to merge code from Linux (released under GPL 2 only) with code from GCC (released under GPL 3 or later). There is no lawful way to do it. GPL 2 and GPL 3 have requirements that conflict, so there is no way to satisfy them both. If Linux were released under "GPL 2 or later", there would be no incompatibility; merging code from Linux with code from GCC (or any other program under "GPL 3 or later") would be possible. See https://gnu.org/licenses/license-compatibility.html. -- Dr Richard Stallman Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] Most of the packages on GitHub are not free software (or open source) because they carry no license to permit redistribution and modification. -- Dr Richard Stallman Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 14:32:54 +0100 inasprecali wrote: > Please forgive my ignorance, but what's wrong exactly in licensing > under only a single version of the GPL? https://www.gnu.org/licenses/identify-licenses-clearly.html -- Félicien Pillot 2C7C ACC0 FBDB ADBA E7BC 50D9 043C D143 6C87 9372 felic...@gnu.org - felicien.pil...@riseup.net pgpIqwrWphsdp.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
nipponm...@firemail.cc writes: > Github is "software development as social media". > Thus all you have is backbiting and gossip as 90% of the "development". > Additionally Microsoft encouraged the additions of additional writings > alongside the licenses such as "Codes of Conduct." > > So now you have your licenses (maybe), and then extra writings (CoC)s > that can be incorporated if the thing goes to court. I think CoC is practically double-edged, if a FOSS wants to be a product-level, there must be some rules for contributors. However, this could be just contribute-guide or something similar. There're some projects requires you sign the CoC first, then you can be invited to fetch the code. Well, I'm not sure, but doesn't it sound like a NDA? I always tell people around me, don't mixup with opensource and free, because proprietary can also give you source code by signing NDA. The opensourced code can be proprietary. But I think the opensource concept is so popular that people can never distince it from free. Not many young people know the history. The NDA pattern has been always existing, open-after-NDA pattern is not a new concept which is SOME of the situations in opensource world. I guess I should write more articles than codes... > Git was supposed to be the opposite of this: decentralized, > uncontrollable. I do think the most successful free software project using Git is Linux kernel, since it consists of so many contributors in a real distributed way. No one even afraid that you can't get Linux kernel code some day just because some servers are down. But nowadays, many people has only one remote copy on GitHub. So if their hardisk is down, and GitHub is down, there's nothing. Of course, this is something to do with good habit, not a problem of GitHub. Best regards. -- GNU Powered it GPL Protected it GOD Blessed it HFG - NalaGinrut Fingerprint F53B 4C56 95B5 E4D5 6093 4324 8469 6772 846A 0058 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
After microsoft puchased Github, they encouraged "Codes of Conduct". So now 40k "opensource projects" hace CoC's. Obviously men won't be contributing to said projects, other than the people allready in them. On 2019-11-27 10:02, Jean Louis wrote: * Nala Ginrut [2019-11-20 09:03]: > Why Windows sucks: > https://itvision.altervista.org/why-windows-10-sucks.html Yeah, I've shared this article in my last company, it's a good post. Microsoft takes the honor of FOSS nowadays, everyone praise them just like they're leading the free software movement. And they're trying to get rid of free software, avoid to mention GNU & FSF, and credit to open source concept. Hmm...not a good manner, at least. I have to say, it was in my anticipation, when they first time came to FOSS, but I didn't expect they change their face so fast. Nice job Microsoft! I don't trust Microsoft anything. If they purchased Github, it was not for reason to foster free software. It is apparent reason, why should they be doing that. Let us think logical. Most logical to me is that they have long term to kill Github just like Google does with various competitive companies, please see https://killedbygoogle.com/
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Github is "software development as social media". Thus all you have is backbiting and gossip as 90% of the "development". Additionally Microsoft encouraged the additions of additional writings alongside the licenses such as "Codes of Conduct." So now you have your licenses (maybe), and then extra writings (CoC)s that can be incorporated if the thing goes to court. Git was supposed to be the opposite of this: decentralized, uncontrollable. On 2019-11-28 04:17, Richard Stallman wrote: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] GitHub's encouragement of sloppy licensing, no licensing, or licensing under only a single version of the GPL, has done terrible harm to our community. GitHub was so bad for free software, all along, that I could imagine Microsoft's making it less bad, or making it more bad. We should judge by what actually happens, not by prejudice. Keep in mind that Apple is much worse than Microsoft.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Well, The God Father said:"Never hate your enemies. It affects your judgment." ;-) Best regards. Jean Louis writes: > For Microsoft I judge by previous pattern, fur example using GNU system in > Windows and never calling it neither GNU neither putting attention to free > software. > > Pattern of users abuse increased over time at that company. I can't get away > of my prejudices based on history. > > > On November 28, 2019 4:41:30 AM UTC, Nala Ginrut wrote: >> >>Richard Stallman writes: >> >>> We should judge by what actually happens, not by prejudice. >> >>Agreed, my mistake. >> >>Best regards. -- GNU Powered it GPL Protected it GOD Blessed it HFG - NalaGinrut Fingerprint F53B 4C56 95B5 E4D5 6093 4324 8469 6772 846A 0058 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
For Microsoft I judge by previous pattern, fur example using GNU system in Windows and never calling it neither GNU neither putting attention to free software. Pattern of users abuse increased over time at that company. I can't get away of my prejudices based on history. On November 28, 2019 4:41:30 AM UTC, Nala Ginrut wrote: > >Richard Stallman writes: > >> We should judge by what actually happens, not by prejudice. > >Agreed, my mistake. > >Best regards.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] GitHub's encouragement of sloppy licensing, no licensing, or licensing under only a single version of the GPL, has done terrible harm to our community. GitHub was so bad for free software, all along, that I could imagine Microsoft's making it less bad, or making it more bad. We should judge by what actually happens, not by prejudice. Keep in mind that Apple is much worse than Microsoft. -- Dr Richard Stallman Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
IIRC, the most famous case is Farecast, which was aquired by M$ with a high price 110M dollars then just shutdown because its data source was controlled by Google. I guess if free software affect GitHub so much, then they will shutdown it without a hesitation. Best regards. Alexandre François Garreau writes: > Le mercredi 27 novembre 2019, 11:02:16 CET Jean Louis a écrit : >> Most logical to me is that they have long term to kill Github just >> like Google does with various competitive companies, please see >> https://killedbygoogle.com/ > > This website doesn’t list at all competitive companies bought or killed, > but discontinued apps that Google often created and experienced itself. -- GNU Powered it GPL Protected it GOD Blessed it HFG - NalaGinrut Fingerprint F53B 4C56 95B5 E4D5 6093 4324 8469 6772 846A 0058 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
I don't think this is entirely the case. Even though many people would migrate to gitlab or other services, countless projects that are no longer being maintained or not very active would be lost. Nov 27, 2019, 10:19 by g...@adamspiers.org: > On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 10:02, Jean Louis <> bugs@gnu.support> > wrote: > >> I don't trust Microsoft anything. If they purchased Github, it was not >> for reason to foster free software. It is apparent reason, why should >> they be doing that. Let us think logical. >> >> Most logical to me is that they have long term to kill Github just >> like Google does with various competitive companies, please see >> https://killedbygoogle.com/ >> > > Killing GitHub would actually help Free Software, because then most > Free Software projects on there would migrate to GitLab and other > more free git hosting platforms. That already happened to a smaller > extent when Microsoft bought GitHub; there was a noticeable exodus. > So in fact the purchase has already helped Free Software :-) >
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Le mercredi 27 novembre 2019, 11:02:16 CET Jean Louis a écrit : > Most logical to me is that they have long term to kill Github just > like Google does with various competitive companies, please see > https://killedbygoogle.com/ This website doesn’t list at all competitive companies bought or killed, but discontinued apps that Google often created and experienced itself.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Adam Spiers writes: > Killing GitHub would actually help Free Software, because then most > Free Software projects on there would migrate to GitLab and other > more free git hosting platforms. That already happened to a smaller > extent when Microsoft bought GitHub; there was a noticeable exodus. > So in fact the purchase has already helped Free Software :-) Yes, I'm also positive on this point. Actually, such kind of scheme can only play once, if Microsoft made it, then contributors will not trust them anymore. However, I'm a bit concern that Microsoft may destroy the faith of contributors. Because if GitHub is down, people may thought FOSS is failed on business, which is never true. And I'm trying to find better business model for FOSS as an entrepreneur. I don't know, but I believe I can find a better way to survive. Best regards. -- GNU Powered it GPL Protected it GOD Blessed it HFG - NalaGinrut Fingerprint F53B 4C56 95B5 E4D5 6093 4324 8469 6772 846A 0058 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 10:02, Jean Louis wrote: > I don't trust Microsoft anything. If they purchased Github, it was not > for reason to foster free software. It is apparent reason, why should > they be doing that. Let us think logical. > > Most logical to me is that they have long term to kill Github just > like Google does with various competitive companies, please see > https://killedbygoogle.com/ Killing GitHub would actually help Free Software, because then most Free Software projects on there would migrate to GitLab and other more free git hosting platforms. That already happened to a smaller extent when Microsoft bought GitHub; there was a noticeable exodus. So in fact the purchase has already helped Free Software :-)
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
* Nala Ginrut [2019-11-20 09:03]: > > Why Windows sucks: > > https://itvision.altervista.org/why-windows-10-sucks.html > > Yeah, I've shared this article in my last company, it's a good post. > > Microsoft takes the honor of FOSS nowadays, everyone praise them just > like they're leading the free software movement. And they're trying to get > rid of free software, avoid to mention GNU & FSF, and credit to open > source concept. Hmm...not a good manner, at least. > > I have to say, it was in my anticipation, when they first time came to > FOSS, but I didn't expect they change their face so fast. Nice job > Microsoft! I don't trust Microsoft anything. If they purchased Github, it was not for reason to foster free software. It is apparent reason, why should they be doing that. Let us think logical. Most logical to me is that they have long term to kill Github just like Google does with various competitive companies, please see https://killedbygoogle.com/
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
On the chans, everyone thinks GUIX is a systemd distro. While praising dmd. There is confusion. No one has heard of the name change. On 2019-11-23 10:15, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: nipponm...@firemail.cc writes: The D compiler is dmd rather than dc? You could call dmd gdmd (gnu dmd) or g-dmd. This ship has sailed. You are a few years late. shepard systemd they get confused. Usually one reads the first and last letter of a word and not the middle. Same first and last letter, same lenght Shepherd systemd Not the same length. Pronounced wildly differently. Only one with a protruding “y”. people think GUIX runs systemd. I don’t think you can speak for others. I have not met a single person who thought Guix System runs systemd. On the contrary, people who dislike systemd for various reasons and considered this important enough to search for a system that uses a different init daemon have searched and found Guix. -- Ricardo
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
The D compiler is dmd rather than dc? You could call dmd gdmd (gnu dmd) or g-dmd. shepard systemd they get confused. Usually one reads the first and last letter of a word and not the middle. Same first and last letter, same lenght, same context, similar shape: people think GUIX runs systemd. On 2019-11-22 22:42, Taylan Kammer wrote: On 18.11.2019 03:21, Richard Stallman wrote: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > > I also don't think that shepherd is a better name, dmd far better > > describes the intent Wolfgang and I had when we wrote and designed it. > It wasn’t our decision to rename dmd to shepherd. I liked “dmd” too. What was the reason to change it? Does anyone thing the new name is better? The reason is that the compiler for the D programming language is also called DMD. If I remember correctly, it's older than GNU DMD, so the courteous thing to do was change the name of GNU DMD. I think GNU Shepherd is a nice name. - Taylan
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Ricardo Wurmus writes: > nipponm...@firemail.cc writes: >> people think GUIX runs systemd. > > I don’t think you can speak for others. I don't think many people thought Guix runs systemd, on the contrary, many people thought GNU hackers hate systemd, and they asked on Quora. I don't know how many people here dislike systemd, but I'm of of the haters. > I have not met a single person who thought Guix System runs systemd. On > the contrary, people who dislike systemd for various reasons and > considered this important enough to search for a system that uses a > different init daemon have searched and found Guix. Agreed, at least I never thought Guix runs systemd even in the beginning, but I thought it's traditional LSB init scripts. -- GNU Powered it GPL Protected it GOD Blessed it HFG - NalaGinrut Fingerprint F53B 4C56 95B5 E4D5 6093 4324 8469 6772 846A 0058 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
nipponm...@firemail.cc writes: > The D compiler is dmd rather than dc? > > You could call dmd gdmd (gnu dmd) or g-dmd. This ship has sailed. You are a few years late. > shepard > systemd > > they get confused. Usually one reads the first and last letter of a > word and not the middle. Same first and last letter, same lenght Shepherd systemd Not the same length. Pronounced wildly differently. Only one with a protruding “y”. > people think GUIX runs systemd. I don’t think you can speak for others. I have not met a single person who thought Guix System runs systemd. On the contrary, people who dislike systemd for various reasons and considered this important enough to search for a system that uses a different init daemon have searched and found Guix. -- Ricardo
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
* Nala Ginrut [2019-11-20 13:34]: > > With BSD licenses you are not ensured to get the sources. Such BSD > > software with sources is good, but if you get binaries under BSD > > license, you have no idea what is going on, thus it is again sales of > > poison, which Windoze systems are proving over and over again since > > decades. > > I know it is hard for certain people to understand GPL, however, I also > failed to understand BSD. If somebody takes my code, and they can close > it and sell it just like it is theirs, how can people accept that? Well, I > feel there's a big gap between people's mind... It is the attitude "do whatever you want with it". GPL licensed software is more noble, it carries moral value and weight with it, the attitude is something like "do whatever you want while respecting free software". > Microsoft takes the honor of FOSS nowadays, everyone praise them just > like they're leading the free software movement. And they're trying to get > rid of free software, avoid to mention GNU & FSF, and credit to open > source concept. Hmm...not a good manner, at least. That is my feeling too.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
* Ricardo Wurmus [2019-11-16 14:49]:
>
> Alfred M. Szmidt writes:
>
> > I also don't think that shepherd is a better name, dmd far better
> > describes the intent Wolfgang and I had when we wrote and designed it.
>
> It wasn’t our decision to rename dmd to shepherd. I liked “dmd” too.
>
> > Infact, most of the commands now make little sense...
>
> Could you please elaborate? They are just “herd
> {start|stop|restart|anything…}”.
>
> --
> Ricardo
Here it is how it was renamed, Guix developers proposed it, Stallman
approved it:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-01/msg00274.html
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Jean Louis writes: > We humans invent all the time things that we do not currently need on > the market. > ... Demand can be > created. Yes, I've been trying both, I also have some advanced projects that can be realized in the future. > Well I don't know what you mean with religion, it is certainly not. Forget about it please, it's my mistake to say it twice so that it sounds like an emphersis. > With BSD licenses you are not ensured to get the sources. Such BSD > software with sources is good, but if you get binaries under BSD > license, you have no idea what is going on, thus it is again sales of > poison, which Windoze systems are proving over and over again since > decades. I know it is hard for certain people to understand GPL, however, I also failed to understand BSD. If somebody takes my code, and they can close it and sell it just like it is theirs, how can people accept that? Well, I feel there's a big gap between people's mind... > Why Windows sucks: > https://itvision.altervista.org/why-windows-10-sucks.html Yeah, I've shared this article in my last company, it's a good post. Microsoft takes the honor of FOSS nowadays, everyone praise them just like they're leading the free software movement. And they're trying to get rid of free software, avoid to mention GNU & FSF, and credit to open source concept. Hmm...not a good manner, at least. I have to say, it was in my anticipation, when they first time came to FOSS, but I didn't expect they change their face so fast. Nice job Microsoft! Anyway, since I've started my adventure around FOSS business, I guess I have to fight agaist them someday. Even if I just talk about the business. Best regards. -- GNU Powered it GPL Protected it GOD Blessed it HFG - NalaGinrut Fingerprint F53B 4C56 95B5 E4D5 6093 4324 8469 6772 846A 0058 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going. -- "You" means "anyone", not you specifically.
Kete via Discussions about the development of the GNU system writes: > On 11/16/2019 02:31 AM, Nala Ginrut wrote: >> Linus Tovalds had derided developers for decades, but no one >> jump out to force him to step down. > There have been strong concerns about Torvalds' language and the working > environment around kernel development. Yes, I didn't make Linus Tovalds a good example about the communication. What I meant is that some people looks easy to be irritated just because they have prejudice with somebody. Best regards. -- GNU Powered it GPL Protected it GOD Blessed it HFG - NalaGinrut Fingerprint F53B 4C56 95B5 E4D5 6093 4324 8469 6772 846A 0058 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going. -- "You" means "anyone", not you specifically.
nipponm...@firemail.cc writes: > "You" in this instance means "anyone". > It is an aspect of american english. I didn't make misunderstanding on this point. I said so in case others made misunderstanding. > So here I was saying: If Eben derides young men of a certain class, > young men of that class are less likely to want to work on the thing > Eben is supporting. Eben then says this is his goal: less young men of > that class. As I said, people looks irritated is because they have prejudice with somebody. Linus Tovalds had derided developers for decades, but no one jump out to force him to step down. And more youngmen in my country want to contribute to Linux kernel very much. Best regards. -- GNU Powered it GPL Protected it GOD Blessed it HFG - NalaGinrut Fingerprint F53B 4C56 95B5 E4D5 6093 4324 8469 6772 846A 0058 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Le vendredi 15 novembre 2019 09:41:17 CET, vous avez écrit : > * Alfred M. Szmidt [2019-11-14 06:21]: > >Le mercredi 13 novembre 2019, 19:23:43 CET Kete via Discussions > >about the> > >development of the GNU system a écrit : > >> I disagree that they betrayed RMS. I still like the Guix > >> contributors, > >> probably even more now. Your systemd statement is confusing > >> because they made their own service program called shepherd. > > > >To be precise, GNU Shepherd is the continuation of an old init > >software > >originally called GNU DMD, written in Scheme, that was intended to > >provide init system to the Hurd before Guix and systemd existed > >(and happened to already provide some of the best features of > >systemd (like dependency graph, parallelism, etc.) > > > > GNU dmd was never intended for the Hurd, it was far more general in > > spirit. One of the goals was that each user should be able to manage > > daemons, and give back some of the closed garden that is the init > > system. > > > > I also don't think that shepherd is a better name, dmd far better > > describes the intent Wolfgang and I had when we wrote and designed it. > > Infact, most of the commands now make little sense... > > Alright, Shepherd changed and became Guix specific software. Maybe > they will make it better. ams said the opposite likely, at least for interface( > One thing about Shepherd is that it is > lacking some justification. There are already good ways to start/stop > daemons, I don't know what shepherd is bringing other than that it is > GNU project. It’s lisp (actually that’s pretty common/peculiar to GNU), it’s GPLv3, and as stated before it offers parallelism support and per-usage daemon management (some features that are used nowadays to advertise systemd: I wouldn’t be suprised there are others). > In my opinion it has been adopted for Guix only for being > GNU and Guile based project. Very likely. It offers better integration and since it’s the same language, better hackability by the same pool of hackers/users… > Probably it was not Guile before. Yes it was. I remember very well it was already scheme and I tried it with Guile, when it was called DMD. > In case of the service manager I would rather like to see technical > advantages over some others. I disagree. When Debian used SysVinit, I recall when running a server I hacked *a hell lot* of shellscripts to install new stuff, modify how my stuff was ran, disable services, etc. It was pretty straightforward when knowing commands (but I don’t recall to having found a central manual (man, info, --help, whatever) so I didn’t know so much about its automatic symlinking and such… unlike systemd and DMD/Shepherd! Except I’d barely like to read a manual from a linux tool that keep eating monolithically, changing, and is only GPLv2 (systemd)), and when ignoring the standard right-way of doing stuff, it was pretty straightforward to get anything done by hacking some script in the place you wanted… So, for init/daemon-management software, to me hackability and usage pleasure is a *great* advantage (below all the other technical features). Scripting through bourne shell as it was with SysVinit was good, scheme scripting is even better (as it is a “real” language). > GNU project has one other program invocation and execution supervisor, > that is pies: It seems to be made by Sergey Poznyakoff, the same who did DMD in the first place. I’m pretty sure they don’t totally overlap. Also I guess GNU pies is not an init (pid 1) software. And anyway for various historical reasons there are several duplicates and redundant packages within GNU, deal with it :/ > Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2019 17:42:29 +0300 > From: Sergey Poznyakoff > To: info-...@gnu.org > Subject: pies-1.4 released [stable] > Organization: GNU.org.ua > > Hello, > > This is to announce the release of GNU pies version 1.4. > > GNU pies (pronounced ``p-yes'') is a program invocation and execution > supervisor. It starts and controls execution of external programs, > making it possible, in particular, to run in background programs that > were not designed to be run as daemons. Pies configuration file allows > administrator to specify arbitrary actions to be executed upon program > termination (depending on its exit code or signal number it was > terminated by). It gives administrators complete control over the > execution environment of each program. This includes modifying shell > environment, running programs with the given user privileges, etc. The > standard error and/or standard output of any component can be > redirected either to a disk file or to syslog. > > See the end of this message for a list of noteworthy changes in this > version. > > Here are the compressed sources: > http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/pies/pies-1.4.tar.gz (1.6MB) > http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/pies/pies-1.4.tar.bz2 (1.2MB) > >
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
* Alfred M. Szmidt [2019-11-14 06:21]: > >Le mercredi 13 novembre 2019, 19:23:43 CET Kete via Discussions about the >development of the GNU system a écrit : >> I disagree that they betrayed RMS. I still like the Guix contributors, >> probably even more now. Your systemd statement is confusing because they >> made their own service program called shepherd. > >To be precise, GNU Shepherd is the continuation of an old init software >originally called GNU DMD, written in Scheme, that was intended to provide >init system to the Hurd before Guix and systemd existed (and happened to >already provide some of the best features of systemd (like dependency >graph, parallelism, etc.) > > GNU dmd was never intended for the Hurd, it was far more general in > spirit. One of the goals was that each user should be able to manage > daemons, and give back some of the closed garden that is the init > system. > I also don't think that shepherd is a better name, dmd far better > describes the intent Wolfgang and I had when we wrote and designed it. > Infact, most of the commands now make little sense... Alright, Shepherd changed and became Guix specific software. Maybe they will make it better. One thing about Shepherd is that it is lacking some justification. There are already good ways to start/stop daemons, I don't know what shepherd is bringing other than that it is GNU project. In my opinion it has been adopted for Guix only for being GNU and Guile based project. Probably it was not Guile before. In case of the service manager I would rather like to see technical advantages over some others. GNU project has one other program invocation and execution supervisor, that is pies: Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2019 17:42:29 +0300 From: Sergey Poznyakoff To: info-...@gnu.org Subject: pies-1.4 released [stable] Organization: GNU.org.ua Hello, This is to announce the release of GNU pies version 1.4. GNU pies (pronounced ``p-yes'') is a program invocation and execution supervisor. It starts and controls execution of external programs, making it possible, in particular, to run in background programs that were not designed to be run as daemons. Pies configuration file allows administrator to specify arbitrary actions to be executed upon program termination (depending on its exit code or signal number it was terminated by). It gives administrators complete control over the execution environment of each program. This includes modifying shell environment, running programs with the given user privileges, etc. The standard error and/or standard output of any component can be redirected either to a disk file or to syslog. See the end of this message for a list of noteworthy changes in this version. Here are the compressed sources: http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/pies/pies-1.4.tar.gz (1.6MB) http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/pies/pies-1.4.tar.bz2 (1.2MB) https://www.gnu.org/s/pies GNU pies can also be used as init daemon — the first process started during booting. The configuration can be supplied both as a traditional /etc/inittab file or as a native GNU pies configuration file, which gives much more flexibility. The control interface provides extensive monitoring and management capabilities. It has better syntax, and does not depend on Guile. I do not have time now, but I would make GNU free system distribution based on skarnet.org's small & secure supervision software suite. Comes with an ultra-fast init replacement, process management tools, an asynchronous locking library, and more. That one has serious underlying justification and simplicity of use. Shepherd does not. I do not know about pies. Jean
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
On 14.11.2019 00:47, nipponm...@firemail.cc wrote: > Svante Signell: don't give me nightmares: I'm a videogame programmer and > attorney; not a systems programmer. Wait, I thought you were one of those Real Hackers, unlike the silly wimmin who only code trivial things (like games, one might think). I must have been wrong to assume that a programmer's skills are positively correlated with their obnoxiousness. - Taylan
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Le jeudi 14 novembre 2019, 06:19:54 CET Alfred M. Szmidt a écrit : > GNU dmd was never intended for the Hurd, it was far more general in > spirit. Oh I must have misread or misrecalled then, thank you very much for correction. > I also don't think that shepherd is a better name, dmd far better > describes the intent Wolfgang and I had when we wrote and designed it. Then shepherd fits less well than I thought (because of the pun of shep- herd/hurd). Yet it is more understandable than an acronym… thought the acronym meaning directly explains its usage. > Infact, most of the commands now make little sense... This is really unfortunate :( I didn’t look much further since then
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
nipponm...@firemail.cc writes: > RMS could do it, remember he did the first version of GCC in a > week. Also I get the impression that, for many people, gnu (and > programming for the FSF) is used as "babys first coding job", while > RMS is a true wizard programmer. Well, I believe RMS doesn't need to do so. There're always youngman, let them get the chance. See what? Prof. Tanenbaum was trying to write a good OS, then there was a youngman made it. It looks like Linux or other proprietary commercial OSs are unbeatable, who knows? When new things come, it break everything you ever understand, and the old things will obsolete in a minute. We just need some time. Wait and see. Best regards. -- GNU Powered it GPL Protected it GOD Blessed it HFG - NalaGinrut Fingerprint F53B 4C56 95B5 E4D5 6093 4324 8469 6772 846A 0058 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
I'm not making it up: the users think Guix is a systemd distro: you need to make it clear that it is not (note: in the init system debates GNU DMD was spoken of glowingly, they don't know it changed names either). Perhaps put on the main page: Init system: shepard (old name: GNU DMD). Many have said on the anon tech message boards "I wanted to use Guix, but [(some complaints RMS asked me not to mention)] and also use systemd". shepard systemd Speed readers would miss the middle letters, which is likely what is happening. On 2019-11-14 04:09, Eric Bavier wrote: - On Nov 13, 2019, at 8:37 PM, nipponm...@firemail.cc wrote: shepherd You will have to advertise that. Most users are under the impression the Guix is a systemd distribution. In my 5 years of hacking on Guix, this is the first time I've heard someone try to draw a connection between Guix and systemd. The Guix manual in the "Services" section says that services are managed by GNU Shepherd. The only mention of systemd in the manual is in relation to controlling guix-daemon when using Guix on a foreign distro, e.g.: "If your host distro uses the systemd init system...".
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Le mercredi 13 novembre 2019, 19:23:43 CET Kete via Discussions about the development of the GNU system a écrit : > I disagree that they betrayed RMS. I still like the Guix contributors, > probably even more now. Your systemd statement is confusing because they > made their own service program called shepherd. To be precise, GNU Shepherd is the continuation of an old init software originally called GNU DMD, written in Scheme, that was intended to provide init system to the Hurd before Guix and systemd existed (and happened to already provide some of the best features of systemd (like dependency graph, parallelism, etc.) But actually, even related to the Hurd, Shepherd is a better name, and it is very cool the development was resumed. That’s a very good thing Guix people did, whatever are the issues of their software distribution / package manager.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > With linux-libre one is still beholden to the decisions of those in > control of the upstream linux project. I think that exaggerates the situation. We release a modified version of Firefox, with our own changes that mostly do not get installed upstream. We could do that with Linux if we needed to. So far, there has been no need to do that, and I hope there won't be a need. But we are not trapped. I see this as an issue of some concern but no reason for alarm. -- Dr Richard Stallman Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Svante Signell: don't give me nightmares: I'm a videogame programmer and attorney; not a systems programmer. Though in the books I've read they atleast gave you more registers in AMD64. Right now an inflection point exists: if you do the work you can seize the day. Linus has abdicated: the chair is empty. From now on an unhappy amalgom of hirelings of the various corporate contributors will vvy for control of linux; until they kill it. Hackers are not permitted to "contribute": the CoC makes this clear, and was added when Linus was "cancled". That's the point of such social controls: to make it clear to free men (hackers) that they are _not_ wanted. On 2019-11-13 21:03, Svante Signell wrote: On Wed, 2019-11-13 at 20:37 +, nipponm...@firemail.cc wrote: > Anyway... Hurd needs 64 bit support to take over where Linux has decided to abdicate. We are happy to review patches. Thanks!
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
On Wed, 2019-11-13 at 20:37 +, nipponm...@firemail.cc wrote: > > > Anyway... Hurd needs 64 bit support to take over where Linux has decided > to abdicate. We are happy to review patches. Thanks!
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
shepherd
You will have to advertise that. Most users are under the impression the
Guix is a systemd distribution.
Calling for the removal of RMS from his own project /Gnu/ when he was
under enormous social pressure over nothing ("u r pedo!" -- the
"community" (note: all actual hackers support RMS in whomever he wishes
to love: and hope he gets happiness)), and was forced to /REVERSE/ his
previous statements (an affront to free speech, free thought,etc) after
being "worked on" for months...
Well lets say you lose everything: your position, your foundation, but
you have GNU: your programming project: the FIRST thing.
Then they try to take THAT away from you: what they are trying to do is
push you into despair: to kill you via suicide.
This is effective and used often in my country.
Yea: they stabbed him in the back and don't give one damn about him.
They have a "what have you done for me lately" attitude at best.
(Now, one note: one of my projects was /canceled/ by these same sort of
people in 2009. (Removed because of what _I_ opined, even though it was
freesoftware). )
Anyway... Hurd needs 64 bit support to take over where Linux has decided
to abdicate.
On 2019-11-13 18:23, Kete via Discussions about the development of the
GNU system wrote:
I disagree that they betrayed RMS. I still like the Guix contributors,
probably even more now. Your systemd statement is confusing because
they
made their own service program called shepherd.
On 11/13/2019 01:14 PM, nipponm...@firemail.cc wrote:
After them stabbing RMS in the back, who would be motivated to have
anything to do with them? Also they are a systemd distribution: so are
directed by the decisions of IBM (RedHat), not hackers, in the end.
On 2019-11-13 11:31, Svante Signell wrote:
On Wed, 2019-11-13 at 16:36 +0530, Jean Louis wrote:
It is time to make fully free FSF endorsed GNU/Hurd
distribution.
As you might know, Guix is working on to also support GNU/Hurd. Maybe
you can
make contributions there (in addition to Debian GNU/Hurd).
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
I disagree that they betrayed RMS. I still like the Guix contributors, probably even more now. Your systemd statement is confusing because they made their own service program called shepherd. On 11/13/2019 01:14 PM, nipponm...@firemail.cc wrote: > After them stabbing RMS in the back, who would be motivated to have > anything to do with them? Also they are a systemd distribution: so are > directed by the decisions of IBM (RedHat), not hackers, in the end. > > On 2019-11-13 11:31, Svante Signell wrote: >> On Wed, 2019-11-13 at 16:36 +0530, Jean Louis wrote: >>> >>> It is time to make fully free FSF endorsed GNU/Hurd >>> distribution. >> >> As you might know, Guix is working on to also support GNU/Hurd. Maybe >> you can >> make contributions there (in addition to Debian GNU/Hurd). > -- https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
I must concur: 64 bit is needed. On 2019-11-13 10:53, Alexander Vdolainen wrote:
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
After them stabbing RMS in the back, who would be motivated to have anything to do with them? Also they are a systemd distribution: so are directed by the decisions of IBM (RedHat), not hackers, in the end. On 2019-11-13 11:31, Svante Signell wrote: On Wed, 2019-11-13 at 16:36 +0530, Jean Louis wrote: It is time to make fully free FSF endorsed GNU/Hurd distribution. As you might know, Guix is working on to also support GNU/Hurd. Maybe you can make contributions there (in addition to Debian GNU/Hurd).
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
* Svante Signell [2019-11-13 17:01]: > On Wed, 2019-11-13 at 16:36 +0530, Jean Louis wrote: > > > > It is time to make fully free FSF endorsed GNU/Hurd > > distribution. > > As you might know, Guix is working on to also support GNU/Hurd. Maybe you can > make contributions there (in addition to Debian GNU/Hurd). That is excellent and it is good for Western world users. Yet Guix operating system has higher requirements, it is not operating system for average user, especially not for people in third world countries. While global perception is that Internet is everywhere, it is not quite, and people in third world countries still use older computers, Internet is very expensive or difficult to reach. From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Guix#Guix_System_Distribution Quote: At the cost of greater storage requirements, all upgrades in Guix are guaranteed to be both atomic and efficiently rolled back. This also enables multiple users to safely install software on the same system without administrator privileges. The extra storage requirements translates to greater bandwidth usage when binary substitutes are downloaded compared to distributions such as Debian. If the user chooses to build everything from source even larger storage space and bandwidth is required. That is my experience, for simple upgrade, I had to spend considerable amount of data, waiting time, and space on the hard disk. I think, but not know for sure, that system like Guix SD cannot be used straight from the DVD only, it requires Internet and downloading. Operating system shall be self-contained, usable only from the DVD. I hope I am wrong in case of Guix. My impression is that it depends on Internet and thus it is only for people with Internet connection. Majority of the world computing is still offline. This may sound surprising for many. But that is the case in Rwanda, Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya, Tanzania alone is like France and Germany together, there are Internet points where Internet can be used and there is Internet, but people are not connected. Majority of computers are not connected to Internet. It is possible to use mobile data, but that is very difficult with higher demands, and not reliable. I do hope to get better fully free system distribution that can be used straight from the DVD. Even Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre that I am using now, cannot be installed only from the DVD, not that I know. It required Internet. By duplicating repositories or packages, I could spare Internet to duplicate system on other computers, yet it is very difficult. Jean
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
On Wed, 2019-11-13 at 16:36 +0530, Jean Louis wrote: > > It is time to make fully free FSF endorsed GNU/Hurd > distribution. As you might know, Guix is working on to also support GNU/Hurd. Maybe you can make contributions there (in addition to Debian GNU/Hurd).
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
On Wednesday, November 13, 2019 1:06:12 PM EET Jean Louis wrote: > * Alexander Vdolainen [2019-11-13 16:08]: > > > Minix was made by Professor Tannenbaum. Minix 2.0 worked well and I > > > remember using it. Now there is Minix 3 as full operating system. > > > > And the most successful use is (unfortunately) intel ME. > > That is unfortunate use case. Would Minix be published under copyleft > license, that would not be possible. At least we would know what is > really inside of the CPU. Don't think so, let's assume minix3 kernel and main system services (minix is a real microkernel) are GPLv2, system libraries are LGPLv2, so there are no limits to develop some proprietary drivers and service on top of it. Yep, it's still much better (at least community is able to get core OS sources), but it doesn't affects proprietary stuff. > > That is why each free software user and politician shall vouch and > foster copyleft licenses. > > > > We shall not underestimate the willpower of human beings. > > > > Thank for that, it drives me a little bit. > > It is time to make fully free FSF endorsed GNU/Hurd > distribution. Might be, but is more important to develop Hurd itself. Personally, I have another vision with Hurd (other os) architecture design and development. > > Jean -- Alexander Vdolainen, The evil contractor.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
On Wednesday, November 13, 2019 1:50:52 AM EET Svante Signell wrote: > Hello, Hi, > > below are incomplete answers to your questions and some links. Many facts > are supplied by Samuel Thibault, the main GNU/Hurd developer. Since he is > very busy, he does not want to reply directly due to lack of time to answer > any follow-up questions. > > Thanks! > > On Tue, 2019-11-12 at 10:44 +0200, Alexander Vdolainen wrote: > > Hi, > > IMO GNU Hurd is a good thing to have, btw at the moment Hurd architecture > > > > isn't so good: > > - it's a microkernel, isn't it? if so, why mach still contains drivers > > ... > > We're working on this, precisely. The most promising is usage of rump kernel > drivers, from NetBSD, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rump_kernel. Very > soon these drivers will be supported in Hurd. it's nice to know, will check out this topic later. > > > why not to use a 3rd microkernel generation ... etc ... > > Why doing it? This has been done in the past, it's a lot of work, while > we can on the contrary shrink Mach instead. Just because of IPC, yep it's still possible to do so with Mach, but IMO there are comparable efforts to do so. > > > - MIG ... it's an ugly thing > > Frankly, like all RPC designs. Newer ones have a nice red package, but > in the end the issues will always be the same. And yes and no. I will pin this mail message to reply with more technical details about this later. Personally it isn't something I'm not familiar with. > > > as I understood GNU hurd development has stalled due to the different > > reasons, but one of them is architecture itself. > > Not really, it's the fact that yes it's more complex to make > non-monolithic designs, and thus people prefer to go work on Linux, and > only cry when they happen to want to do containers. Again, it isn't something i'm not familiar with, and from technical point of view monolithic design loses to microkernel design. However, to make microkernel design truly secure iommu is required. As far as I know Hurd doesn't support iommu yet, am I right ? (I would like to be happy if I wrong) > > Very soon now, Gnumach+Hurd will also have SMP support. Regarding 64-bit > support 64bit userland is not planned for, but 64-bit kernelland has made a > lot of progress, see https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/faq/64-bit.html. I suppose full 64bit support is quite required nowadays. It's nice to have an OS sandbox and playground, but I wish Hurd to be a real working horse. > > > To change this a lot of work is required, but nobody wants to go deep with > > that. > > > > however, if we're going to speak about GNU system we're limited with a few > > > > components: > > - GNU userland - ok it exists > > - GNU toolchain - yep it works > > - GNU kernel/system services - ... nope > > > > I know linux kernel just works, but it's not a GNU project. > > Debian GNU/Hurd has been available for a long time. Around 75% of all Debian > packages are available, see I know. > > For more info see: > http://darnassus.sceen.net/~hurd-web/ > https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/index.html is outdated. > https://www.debian.org/ports/hurd/ > https://wiki.debian.org/Debian_GNU/Hurd thank you ! will check out this links too. -- Alexander Vdolainen, The evil contractor. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Hi, On Wednesday, November 13, 2019 8:28:15 AM EET Jean Louis wrote: > * Alexander Vdolainen [2019-11-13 02:32]: > > Hi, > > > > On Tuesday, November 12, 2019 10:05:46 PM EET nipponm...@firemail.cc wrote: > > > RMS could do it. Alot of what is required in software is willpower to do > > > the work. RMS has such. > > > > That's not about RMS. This is a job for a few guys. > > Surely, many projects are done by more people, that is nature of > society and also software projects. People join > > Yet I understand it when person said it is willpower that drives it. > > Several operating systems have been made by single person. I don't say > it is best to do so, but those are willpower driven projects, and > later community joins. I understand it. > > What Samuel Thibault is doing now with Hurd is evidence of willpower. Agreed with that. > > Minix was made by Professor Tannenbaum. Minix 2.0 worked well and I > remember using it. Now there is Minix 3 as full operating system. And the most successful use is (unfortunately) intel ME. > > We shall not underestimate the willpower of human beings. Thank for that, it drives me a little bit. -- Alexander Vdolainen, The evil contractor.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
* Alexander Vdolainen [2019-11-13 02:32]: > Hi, > > On Tuesday, November 12, 2019 10:05:46 PM EET nipponm...@firemail.cc wrote: > > RMS could do it. Alot of what is required in software is willpower to do > > the work. RMS has such. > That's not about RMS. This is a job for a few guys. Surely, many projects are done by more people, that is nature of society and also software projects. People join Yet I understand it when person said it is willpower that drives it. Several operating systems have been made by single person. I don't say it is best to do so, but those are willpower driven projects, and later community joins. What Samuel Thibault is doing now with Hurd is evidence of willpower. Minix was made by Professor Tannenbaum. Minix 2.0 worked well and I remember using it. Now there is Minix 3 as full operating system. We shall not underestimate the willpower of human beings.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Will 64 bit userland come in time? Also will you implement the hardening features of KALSR (net bsd) / GrSecurity-PaX (who invented them). These are necessary features today: otherwise you get rooted quickly. Hurd is needed, Linux is out of the hands of the hackers now. Linus bent the knee totally.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Hello, below are incomplete answers to your questions and some links. Many facts are supplied by Samuel Thibault, the main GNU/Hurd developer. Since he is very busy, he does not want to reply directly due to lack of time to answer any follow-up questions. Thanks! On Tue, 2019-11-12 at 10:44 +0200, Alexander Vdolainen wrote: > Hi, > IMO GNU Hurd is a good thing to have, btw at the moment Hurd architecture > isn't so good: > - it's a microkernel, isn't it? if so, why mach still contains drivers ... We're working on this, precisely. The most promising is usage of rump kernel drivers, from NetBSD, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rump_kernel. Very soon these drivers will be supported in Hurd. > why not to use a 3rd microkernel generation ... etc ... Why doing it? This has been done in the past, it's a lot of work, while we can on the contrary shrink Mach instead. > - MIG ... it's an ugly thing Frankly, like all RPC designs. Newer ones have a nice red package, but in the end the issues will always be the same. > as I understood GNU hurd development has stalled due to the different > reasons, but one of them is architecture itself. Not really, it's the fact that yes it's more complex to make non-monolithic designs, and thus people prefer to go work on Linux, and only cry when they happen to want to do containers. Very soon now, Gnumach+Hurd will also have SMP support. Regarding 64-bit support 64bit userland is not planned for, but 64-bit kernelland has made a lot of progress, see https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/faq/64-bit.html. > To change this a lot of work is required, but nobody wants to go deep with > that. > > however, if we're going to speak about GNU system we're limited with a few > components: > - GNU userland - ok it exists > - GNU toolchain - yep it works > - GNU kernel/system services - ... nope > I know linux kernel just works, but it's not a GNU project. Debian GNU/Hurd has been available for a long time. Around 75% of all Debian packages are available, see For more info see: http://darnassus.sceen.net/~hurd-web/ https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/index.html is outdated. https://www.debian.org/ports/hurd/ https://wiki.debian.org/Debian_GNU/Hurd
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
So where exactly is Hurd in development? I checked and it seems to be available in x86 but not x64. What would it take for one or more people to get it up to date with the latest hardware? Nov 12, 2019, 12:02 by nipponm...@firemail.cc: > With linux-libre one is still beholden to the decisions of those in control > of the upstream linux project. In the past, during the 90s and first > half-decade of the 2000s these were hackers, who had self-agency, and thus > could be trusted to atleast do what is best for programmer-users such as > themselves. What they had was their pride as a hacker: and the credibility > attached to their handle. > > Today the hackers are gone; shut out. Even linus has been "canceled", and has > been brought to heel. Those who are in control of the code are hirelings, who > do not have agency of their own, donated by various corporate entities, who > answer not to their own conscience but to their paymaster. The deal gets > worse every day. > > There is even DRM (yes that DRM) going into Linux now. > > [Other Note: why is my CC line: gnu-system-discuss@gnu.org, > gnu-system-discuss > , isn't one > gnu-system-discuss enough?] > > On 2019-11-12 08:53, Jean Louis wrote: > >> * Alexander Vdolainen [2019-11-12 14:14]: >> >>> however, if we're going to speak about GNU system we're limited with a few >>> components: >>> - GNU userland - ok it exists >>> - GNU toolchain - yep it works >>> - GNU kernel/system services - ... nope >>> I know linux kernel just works, but it's not a GNU project. >>> >> >> Software need not be GNU project to be part of GNU. A purely GNU >> system includes, by definition, non-GNU packages: >> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-11/msg00356.html >> https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html >> >> Quote from GNU Manifesto: >> >> "When the kernel and compiler are finished, it will be possible to >> distribute a GNU system suitable for program development. We will use >> TeX as our text formatter, but an nroff is being worked on. We will >> use the free, portable X Window System as well." >> >> GNU/Linux-libre is GNU project. Please see: >> https://www.gnu.org/s/linux-libre >> >> Thus GNU has the kernel Linux-libre, and Hurd, and other kernels could >> become GNU project. >> >> GNU system was not envisioned to be purely GNU system from its >> inception. >> >> Jean >>
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Hi, On Tuesday, November 12, 2019 10:05:46 PM EET nipponm...@firemail.cc wrote: > RMS could do it. Alot of what is required in software is willpower to do > the work. RMS has such. That's not about RMS. This is a job for a few guys. Well, just to be more clear, if you want a well designed, flexible and advanced system a *group* of people is required, otherwise it will goes the way Hurd does. Just because in order to do so in an adequate timeframe it's neccessary to have at least one expert per domain (those are following): - architecture - kernel bootstrap - arch-independent kernel parts - system services - system libraries - portability expert (and the one who will able to port already existing sw) It's not a good old times (80x-90x) now, system requires much more nowadays. > > Though he once talked about how he felt needed, but not wanted. I wish > he could find a person that would supply what is missing; maybe his > friends could help? (Perhaps even international friends). Maybe it's better to stop talks around this and concentrate on this (i.e. push this topic somewhere, find developers/architects/experts in this area whatever ... ), isn't it ? Most of the people thinks it's a crazy idea to create (or completely redesign) operating system (which is *not*, just because a lot of existing things exists nowadays), and to be more realistic nobody wants to invest time to do so (I didn't count a big commercials (yep, they're doing this - google, huawei ...)). And again, personally I can invest some of my spare time for this (to provide some code, technical consultation, architecture design stuff), but it's all useless since nobody will join to the effort. So, assume 6-8 hours per week of my spare time is used making 312 - 468 hours per year, making about 2-3.8 months of full time job ... let me think ... am i ready to waste this time for another then-will-be-forgotten attempt ? i'm not, do you ? -- Alexander Vdolainen, The evil contractor.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
RMS could do it. Alot of what is required in software is willpower to do the work. RMS has such. Though he once talked about how he felt needed, but not wanted. I wish he could find a person that would supply what is missing; maybe his friends could help? (Perhaps even international friends).
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
With linux-libre one is still beholden to the decisions of those in control of the upstream linux project. In the past, during the 90s and first half-decade of the 2000s these were hackers, who had self-agency, and thus could be trusted to atleast do what is best for programmer-users such as themselves. What they had was their pride as a hacker: and the credibility attached to their handle. Today the hackers are gone; shut out. Even linus has been "canceled", and has been brought to heel. Those who are in control of the code are hirelings, who do not have agency of their own, donated by various corporate entities, who answer not to their own conscience but to their paymaster. The deal gets worse every day. There is even DRM (yes that DRM) going into Linux now. [Other Note: why is my CC line: gnu-system-discuss@gnu.org, gnu-system-discuss , isn't one gnu-system-discuss enough?] On 2019-11-12 08:53, Jean Louis wrote: * Alexander Vdolainen [2019-11-12 14:14]: however, if we're going to speak about GNU system we're limited with a few components: - GNU userland - ok it exists - GNU toolchain - yep it works - GNU kernel/system services - ... nope I know linux kernel just works, but it's not a GNU project. Software need not be GNU project to be part of GNU. A purely GNU system includes, by definition, non-GNU packages: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-11/msg00356.html https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html Quote from GNU Manifesto: "When the kernel and compiler are finished, it will be possible to distribute a GNU system suitable for program development. We will use TeX as our text formatter, but an nroff is being worked on. We will use the free, portable X Window System as well." GNU/Linux-libre is GNU project. Please see: https://www.gnu.org/s/linux-libre Thus GNU has the kernel Linux-libre, and Hurd, and other kernels could become GNU project. GNU system was not envisioned to be purely GNU system from its inception. Jean
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Hi, On Tuesday, November 12, 2019 3:39:00 PM EET دانیال بهزادی wrote: > There is not only Freedom concerns about the future of Linux, but also > technical and practical concerns about a monolithic kernel in the age of > IoT. We need a Free Software kernel to power supercomputers, nanocomputers > and anything between. That's one of my points. microkernel is a way more advanced design, yep, but it's the same way harder to design and implement. And from technical point of view GNU Hurd design isn't so nice ... > در November 12, 2019 8:53:42 AM UTC، Jean Louis نوشت: > >* Alexander Vdolainen [2019-11-12 14:14]: > >> however, if we're going to speak about GNU system we're limited with > > > >a few > > > >> components: > >> - GNU userland - ok it exists > >> - GNU toolchain - yep it works > >> - GNU kernel/system services - ... nope > >> > >> I know linux kernel just works, but it's not a GNU project. > > > >Software need not be GNU project to be part of GNU. A purely GNU > >system includes, by definition, non-GNU packages: > >https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-11/msg00356.html > >https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html > > > >Quote from GNU Manifesto: > > > >"When the kernel and compiler are finished, it will be possible to > >distribute a GNU system suitable for program development. We will use > >TeX as our text formatter, but an nroff is being worked on. We will > >use the free, portable X Window System as well." > > > >GNU/Linux-libre is GNU project. Please see: > >https://www.gnu.org/s/linux-libre > > > >Thus GNU has the kernel Linux-libre, and Hurd, and other kernels could > >become GNU project. > > > >GNU system was not envisioned to be purely GNU system from its > >inception. > > > >Jean > > ارسال از دستگاه اندرویدم با نامه ک-9. لطفاً کوتاهی متن را ببخشید -- Alexander Vdolainen, The evil contractor.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
There is not only Freedom concerns about the future of Linux, but also technical and practical concerns about a monolithic kernel in the age of IoT. We need a Free Software kernel to power supercomputers, nanocomputers and anything between. در November 12, 2019 8:53:42 AM UTC، Jean Louis نوشت: >* Alexander Vdolainen [2019-11-12 14:14]: >> however, if we're going to speak about GNU system we're limited with >a few >> components: >> - GNU userland - ok it exists >> - GNU toolchain - yep it works >> - GNU kernel/system services - ... nope >> I know linux kernel just works, but it's not a GNU project. > >Software need not be GNU project to be part of GNU. A purely GNU >system includes, by definition, non-GNU packages: >https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-11/msg00356.html >https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html > >Quote from GNU Manifesto: > >"When the kernel and compiler are finished, it will be possible to >distribute a GNU system suitable for program development. We will use >TeX as our text formatter, but an nroff is being worked on. We will >use the free, portable X Window System as well." > >GNU/Linux-libre is GNU project. Please see: >https://www.gnu.org/s/linux-libre > >Thus GNU has the kernel Linux-libre, and Hurd, and other kernels could >become GNU project. > >GNU system was not envisioned to be purely GNU system from its >inception. > >Jean ارسال از دستگاه اندرویدم با نامه ک-9. لطفاً کوتاهی متن را ببخشید
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
* Alexander Vdolainen [2019-11-12 14:14]: > however, if we're going to speak about GNU system we're limited with a few > components: > - GNU userland - ok it exists > - GNU toolchain - yep it works > - GNU kernel/system services - ... nope > I know linux kernel just works, but it's not a GNU project. Software need not be GNU project to be part of GNU. A purely GNU system includes, by definition, non-GNU packages: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-11/msg00356.html https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html Quote from GNU Manifesto: "When the kernel and compiler are finished, it will be possible to distribute a GNU system suitable for program development. We will use TeX as our text formatter, but an nroff is being worked on. We will use the free, portable X Window System as well." GNU/Linux-libre is GNU project. Please see: https://www.gnu.org/s/linux-libre Thus GNU has the kernel Linux-libre, and Hurd, and other kernels could become GNU project. GNU system was not envisioned to be purely GNU system from its inception. Jean
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
Hi, IMO GNU Hurd is a good thing to have, btw at the moment Hurd architecture isn't so good: - it's a microkernel, isn't it? if so, why mach still contains drivers ... why not to use a 3rd microkernel generation ... etc ... - MIG ... it's an ugly thing as I understood GNU hurd development has stalled due to the different reasons, but one of them is architecture itself. To change this a lot of work is required, but nobody wants to go deep with that. however, if we're going to speak about GNU system we're limited with a few components: - GNU userland - ok it exists - GNU toolchain - yep it works - GNU kernel/system services - ... nope I know linux kernel just works, but it's not a GNU project. Going back to the topic - I don't think RMS alone will able to close this hole. It's a huge effort. To achieve this a group of interested people is required - and that's the main problem. Do u really want GNU kernel/system services ? If so how are you planning to manage it? On Monday, November 11, 2019 9:04:22 PM EET orbu...@tutanota.com wrote: > I agree with this. Even if it's not RMS, Hurd development has stalled and it > would be really nice if a few people got back to developing it. Like many > of the people in those threads, I fear the direction Linux is going in. > Nov 11, 2019, 05:24 by nipponm...@firemail.cc: > > [I think this is related to the discussion of the gnu system, thus I am > > sending it here] > > > > Users have expressed fear at the future of the linux-kernel; believing > > that it is now out of the hands of any programmer not employed by one of > > the large tech companies, and they fear for the future if the future is > > tied to it, solely (single point of failure). > > > > On the 4chan anime image board, the tech section (one of the few > > free-speech and non-tracking boards still existing (we used to have anon > > chat, bbs, newsgroups, etc)) has asked you if you could program on HURD > > maybe? > > > > Is such possible? A stub for HURD could be perhaps even be made to make > > use of the linux-kernel's various free hardware-drivers maybe... > > > > Also: most of the people on 4chan's technology board love you. > > It's only the people on the /pol/ board (the american-politics board) who > > oppose you. > > > > Links to archives: rbt.asia/g/thread/73511609/ > > > >> Is Herd still being developed? > >> I checked and it hasn't received an update in two years. Are we going to > >> be forever stuck with Linux?> > > --- > > > >> Linux is a disgrace to FOSS > > > > --- > > > >> [Image of your 1983 GNU announcement] > >> BASTE > >> I want our boy back > > > > --- > > > >> it's healthy for the 'scene' to have options > > > > --- > > > >> rbt.asia/g/thread/73511387/#73511742 > >> i do not like how people are making software more and more politicalized. > >> software should be only concerning about the code quality, not about who > >> wrote it or if the person who wrote this section is non-white, etc. i > >> think if Linux (the kernel) followed OpenBSD's rule of 0% political it > >> would be better, but that is not going to happen. i really do hope GNU > >> Hurd will be completed because Linux is just a mess, it also doesnt give > >> me a good impression that i have to use Linux-Libre because Linux > >> includes firmware blobs within the source tree.> > > --- > > > >> rbt.asia/g/thread/73515455/#q73516323 > >> Goodbye, Linux. > >> Hello, GNU Hurd! > >> > >> (There were some criticisms though: > >> ( >RMS stopped programming years ago ) -- Alexander Vdolainen, The evil contractor.
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
I agree with this. Even if it's not RMS, Hurd development has stalled and it would be really nice if a few people got back to developing it. Like many of the people in those threads, I fear the direction Linux is going in. Nov 11, 2019, 05:24 by nipponm...@firemail.cc: > [I think this is related to the discussion of the gnu system, thus I am > sending it here] > > Users have expressed fear at the future of the linux-kernel; believing that > it is now out of the hands of any programmer not employed by one of the large > tech companies, and they fear for the future if the future is tied to it, > solely (single point of failure). > > On the 4chan anime image board, the tech section (one of the few free-speech > and non-tracking boards still existing (we used to have anon chat, bbs, > newsgroups, etc)) has asked you if you could program on HURD maybe? > > Is such possible? A stub for HURD could be perhaps even be made to make use > of the linux-kernel's various free hardware-drivers maybe... > > Also: most of the people on 4chan's technology board love you. > It's only the people on the /pol/ board (the american-politics board) who > oppose you. > > Links to archives: rbt.asia/g/thread/73511609/ > >> Is Herd still being developed? >> I checked and it hasn't received an update in two years. Are we going to be >> forever stuck with Linux? >> > --- > >> Linux is a disgrace to FOSS >> > --- > >> [Image of your 1983 GNU announcement] >> BASTE >> I want our boy back >> > --- > >> it's healthy for the 'scene' to have options >> > --- > >> rbt.asia/g/thread/73511387/#73511742 >> i do not like how people are making software more and more politicalized. >> software should be only concerning about the code quality, not about who >> wrote it or if the person who wrote this section is non-white, etc. i think >> if Linux (the kernel) followed OpenBSD's rule of 0% political it would be >> better, but that is not going to happen. >> i really do hope GNU Hurd will be completed because Linux is just a mess, it >> also doesnt give me a good impression that i have to use Linux-Libre because >> Linux includes firmware blobs within the source tree. >> > --- > >> rbt.asia/g/thread/73515455/#q73516323 >> Goodbye, Linux. >> Hello, GNU Hurd! >> >> (There were some criticisms though: >> ( >RMS stopped programming years ago ) >>
Re: RMS: users request you perhaps program HURD: they fear the path the linux kernel is going.
RMS could do it, remember he did the first version of GCC in a week. Also I get the impression that, for many people, gnu (and programming for the FSF) is used as "babys first coding job", while RMS is a true wizard programmer. It would be better in his hands. You get what you pay for: when you pay little you get little. When you pay your life: you get it all (but at such a cost). Just as an aside: when I mentioned to law professors I wanted to dip my toe in copyright years ago: they suggested working for the FSF, SFConservancy, etc. You get neophytes pretty much for public-works foundations. Except for RMS: he's the real deal. I think it's the copyright attribution requirement (kinda pointless in the USA since you can pull your copyrights anyway, if not a work for hire, after 35 years... : which is why one must see the GNU Copyright licenses as a /tool/ to furthur free-software: not as the _basis_ of freesoftware. There are also other anti-free software laws like ITAR and the crypto regulations: which do you choose? US law, or your creed?) Also the demands made: I just showed someone on this list, a 22 year old frenchman, a 3d Free Software work I'm involved in. He decided to demand I rewrite it from scratch as a 2d or console "app", and use the GTK framework if using 2d. (lol: fsck off moron). He also complained that the game was 3d to begin with, and that it was 6+ GB (yes: lots of FREE(freedom) textures, assets, models, maps, music, etc: that's what games are made of...) So yea: one is not going to get the best, or even good, when you treat your free help as slaves, or allow those who seem to represent your organization to. RMS needs to do HURD if it is ever to come to fruition. (and don't forget all the code execution security features (like GrSecurity/KALSR/etc have): they are needed today) On 2019-11-11 19:04, orbu...@tutanota.com wrote: I agree with this. Even if it's not RMS, Hurd development has stalled and it would be really nice if a few people got back to developing it. Like many of the people in those threads, I fear the direction Linux is going in. Nov 11, 2019, 05:24 by nipponm...@firemail.cc: [I think this is related to the discussion of the gnu system, thus I am sending it here] Users have expressed fear at the future of the linux-kernel; believing that it is now out of the hands of any programmer not employed by one of the large tech companies, and they fear for the future if the future is tied to it, solely (single point of failure). On the 4chan anime image board, the tech section (one of the few free-speech and non-tracking boards still existing (we used to have anon chat, bbs, newsgroups, etc)) has asked you if you could program on HURD maybe? Is such possible? A stub for HURD could be perhaps even be made to make use of the linux-kernel's various free hardware-drivers maybe... Also: most of the people on 4chan's technology board love you. It's only the people on the /pol/ board (the american-politics board) who oppose you. Links to archives: rbt.asia/g/thread/73511609/ Is Herd still being developed? I checked and it hasn't received an update in two years. Are we going to be forever stuck with Linux? --- Linux is a disgrace to FOSS --- [Image of your 1983 GNU announcement] BASTE I want our boy back --- it's healthy for the 'scene' to have options --- rbt.asia/g/thread/73511387/#73511742 i do not like how people are making software more and more politicalized. software should be only concerning about the code quality, not about who wrote it or if the person who wrote this section is non-white, etc. i think if Linux (the kernel) followed OpenBSD's rule of 0% political it would be better, but that is not going to happen. i really do hope GNU Hurd will be completed because Linux is just a mess, it also doesnt give me a good impression that i have to use Linux-Libre because Linux includes firmware blobs within the source tree. --- rbt.asia/g/thread/73515455/#q73516323 Goodbye, Linux. Hello, GNU Hurd! (There were some criticisms though: ( >RMS stopped programming years ago )
