Jeroen Dekkers writes:
useful state. However it is not as urgent anymore as there are some free software kernels.
The Hurd is technically better and it also promotes free software and GNU better. The claims of microsoft saying that free software isn't innovative would just be void, for example.
Oh really? Make me laugh! Not that I doubt the technical superiority of the kernel Hurd, but it won't stop MS from claiming to have invented -- well -- everything (starting with Bits+Bytes, Math etc.).
Thus there are areas, where we do not have Free Software at all. To conquer these might be more important than to develop another kernel.
The Hurd isn't just another kernel. It isn't even a kernel, it is a multiserver system running on a microkernel (gnumach). Also Linux isn't really going good IMHO (just look at the 2.4 versions). IMHO GNU/Hurd also has the potential to be the world leading operating system.
Hi Jeroen,
I'd just wish, you'd cut that out. I -- in example -- am looking forward to the HURD, since I hope ist will solve some of the problems I have with the current 'state-of-the-practice' systems, like, I'd like to see a real process local, user controllable + virtual operating environment (like the fs in plan9). The Unix philosphy is a bit outdated here (just look at the difference between networking and file system, it makes me shudder), but wether Hurd can contribute to a solution here remains still to be evaluated.
In the meantime I have the wish to work on a stable + free (as freedom) system, so Linux is indispensable. I do not think, that another OS war in the free sw camp is helpful now.
That's basically the reason why I write mails promoting the Hurd. Especially because we lack manpower.
Promotion is not like the press gangs, when they where looking for sailors 200 years ago. I think you'll have to accept other peoples needs and preferences.
Regards -- Markus