Re: Getting started with Hurd development.

[donnie]

This all sounds very good to me.
The low-level stuff is what I am most interested in.

Recommend a good starting place on the L4 docs?
or any other L4 port info?

Sorry for all the requests for help, but
I am wanting to get a feel for what the group
is doing and where the development is headed.
Thanks.
__
Donnie

Quoting Bas Wijnen <shevek@fmf.nl>:

> donnie@darthik.com wrote:
> >
> > I like device drivers, scheduling, memory managment, security.
> > I've read that device drivers are a good and simpler way to get
> > started in kernel development...
>
> It sounds to me that you are interested in working on the L4 port,
> particularly the device driver framework.  It would be very nice if
> there would be some usable code for that (which may be replaced
> completely again later, as I'm sure implementing things will cause some
> changing of minds), so I very much encourage that. :-)
>
> >>Another source of information is IRC.  There are a lot of people who
> >>can help you and some that might scare you away.  But you can have a
> >>look on #hug and #hurd on irc.freenode.net for general Hurd discussion
> >>and on #hurd-l4 if you are interested in the L4 Hurd development.
> >
> > Is it expected that Hurd will completely move to the L4 microkernel?
> > In other words, should development not be focused on Mach anymore
> > and just on L4?
>
> It depends who you ask. :-)  I think everyone agrees that Mach is not
> the future microkernel for the Hurd.  L4 probably is (although possibly
> not the only one).  Currently, there is a working GNU/Hurd system on
> Mach.  The L4 port is not workable at all yet, it only just executed its
> first program.
>
> So if we assume that L4 is indeed the way to go, it will still take some
> time before it will be as usable as Mach.  The question is then if we
> should all make that happen sooner, or if we should fix bugs in the Mach
> version while "waiting" for the L4 port to "happen".  Because different
> people answer the question differently, something in between is
> happening.  Bugs get fixed in the Mach version, and work on L4 is done.
>
> Because most bugfixes on the Mach port can be used on the L4 port
> without much (or any) change, this bug fixing is not a waste of time. ;-)
>
> However, I would definitely encourage you to work on the L4 port if you
> like to do low-level stuff.  It needs quite a lot of work and not
> everyone likes this type of programming.
>
> Thanks,
> Bas
>
> --
> I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
> If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
> Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
>     in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
> Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
> For more information, see http://129.125.47.90/e-mail.html
>
>




----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.