[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [OT]: Hurd microkernel portability.

From: Wolfgang Jaehrling
Subject: Re: [OT]: Hurd microkernel portability.
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 18:38:56 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 09:37:20PM +0600, Cherry George Mathew wrote:
> Sorry to barge into the filesystems discussion, but I'm wondering
> whether the hurd team has decided on what level exactly to bind the hurd
> to a microkernel ? The last I heard of this on the l4-hurd list was a
> discussion about ripping up the libc library once again, I think by
> Farid Hajji or so.

I'm not sure what you mean with `ripping up the libc library once

> I'm writing to ask whether its been decided how to tackle this issue
> of portability, which indirectly affects the portability of the Hurd
> as a whole. For example, has anyone decided what to do about the
> Hurd's bindings to Mach ports ?

Neal developed the concept of object handles, which can be implemented
on top of both L4 and Mach, and provides everyting we currently use
ports for.  You can read more about it in the archive of the l4-hurd
mailing list, for example in
and other messages in the same thread.

> It tickles to me read things like, "netbsd, the most portable OS in
> the world", and stuff like that.

Anything wrong with that?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]