[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Hurd/L4 active?
From: |
Martin Barth |
Subject: |
Re: Hurd/L4 active? |
Date: |
Sat, 14 Apr 2007 14:14:10 +0200 |
Hi,
what can anyone do if he or she wants to help at the micro kernel thingie?
Spending time for the mach-kernel seems not very clever, if mach is going to be
replaced.
Regards,
Martin
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 13:43:20 +0200
Pierre THIERRY <address@hidden> wrote:
> Scribit Shams dies 14/04/2007 hora 14:38:
> > I read somewhere that instead of L4, Hurd could be using L4.Sec as the
> > microkernel?
>
> Both Coyotos and L4.sec could be used, it seems.
>
> > > rather an experimental/research subproject.
> > Why another subproject, why not just develop/experiment with the
> > existing Hurd?
>
> Because there are issues with the current Hurd that might not be
> possible to solve while keeping Mach as the ยต-kernel, at least (IIUC, in
> terms of security and performance).
>
> > Btw who calls the shots at which microkernel Hurd is going to be using
> > and the development path for Hurd.
>
> Those who write the code.
>
> Quickly,
> Pierre
- Hurd/L4 active?, Shams, 2007/04/13
- Re: Hurd/L4 active?, olafBuddenhagen, 2007/04/13
- Re: Hurd/L4 active?, Shams, 2007/04/13
- Re: Hurd/L4 active?, Pierre THIERRY, 2007/04/14
- Re: Hurd/L4 active?, Martin Barth, 2007/04/14
- Re: Hurd/L4 active?,
Martin Barth <=
- Re: Hurd/L4 active?, Richard Braun, 2007/04/14
- Re: Hurd/L4 active?, olafBuddenhagen, 2007/04/14
- Re: Hurd/L4 active?, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2007/04/15
- Re: Hurd/L4 active?, olafBuddenhagen, 2007/04/14