[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Let's do some coding :-)
From: |
Bas Wijnen |
Subject: |
Re: Let's do some coding :-) |
Date: |
Wed, 26 Oct 2005 21:32:14 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.11 |
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 08:29:39PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> If you mean the suggestion: defining the goals to cut away design
> options, and then define interfaces, then I totally agree.
>
> I am really very concerned with this question at this very moment, and
> trying to find a good answer. I don't want to give this a rushed
> response. I am also looking for input from anybody whom it may
> concern.
A number of things have been discussed, I'll make a (possibly incomplete) list
and say what my opinion is about it:
- security
We want a secure system, which can run hostile code without any
negative effects on it.
- capabilities
We want them, and we want to use them for everything. Also, we need
them for security.
- persistence
We haven't decided so far. A persistent system has many advantages.
It is something which can also be done partly, for example by giving
the user a persistent session, while having a non-persistent core. At
this moment I think we will want a fully persistent system, but I'm
not sure at all about this.
- real time
So far, the Hurd isn't planned to be a real time operating system.
That is, it doesn't support real time applications. If we can be real
time, it would be nice, but it isn't a priority. Of course we do want
time-critical applications such as audio and video players and
cd-burners to run fluently when the system isn't under heavy load.
(in other words: we don't want to do worse than GNU/Linux.)
That't it so far. If I said we agree on something, and you don't, then
obviously we don't agree on it. :-) In that case, let us know.
Marcus: is this the type of input you wanted?
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
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Re: Let's do some coding :-), (continued)
- Re: Let's do some coding :-), Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/26
- Re: Let's do some coding :-), Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/10/26
- Re: Let's do some coding :-), Alfred M\. Szmidt, 2005/10/26
- Re: Let's do some coding :-), Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/26
- Re: Let's do some coding :-), Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/10/26
- Re: Let's do some coding :-), Alfred M\. Szmidt, 2005/10/26
- Re: Let's do some coding :-), Alfred M\. Szmidt, 2005/10/26
- Hurd Quotes (was: Re: Let's do some coding :-), Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/10/26
- Re: Let's do some coding :-), Bas Wijnen, 2005/10/26
- Re: Let's do some coding :-), Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/10/26
- Re: Let's do some coding :-),
Bas Wijnen <=
- Re: Let's do some coding :-), Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/26
- design goals vs mechanisms (was: Re: Let's do some coding :-), Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/10/26
- Re: design goals vs mechanisms (was: Re: Let's do some coding :-), Bas Wijnen, 2005/10/26
- Re: design goals vs mechanisms, ness, 2005/10/26
- Re: design goals vs mechanisms, Bas Wijnen, 2005/10/27
- Re: design goals vs mechanisms, Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/10/27
- Re: design goals vs mechanisms, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/27
- Re: design goals vs mechanisms, Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/10/27
- Re: design goals vs mechanisms, Brian Brunswick, 2005/10/27
- Re: design goals vs mechanisms (was: Re: Let's do some coding :-), Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/26