Re: Hurd questions

[Shams]

Thanks much for the info.

When you are saying that Debian uses the "CVS HEAD". Do you
mean that this is the offical GNU Hurd CVS repository that is maintained
by the GNU project?

Thanks
Shams

-- 

<olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net> wrote in message 
news:20061010203627.GB8375@sky.local...
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 09:16:18PM +1300, Shams wrote:
>
>> 1. What is the current development status of Hurd?
>
> Not sure what you mean exactly. It's mostly working, but there are a
> number of serious drawbacks:
> - Some specific POSIX bits are still missing or implemented incorrectly,
>  so not all software can be used
> - Very bad hardware support. Many subsystems don't exist at all, like
>  USB or sound
> - There are stability and performance issues
>
>> 2. What is the difference between Debian Hurd and just the "Hurd". -
>> Are they maintained separate cvs branches, totally different code base
>> etc? - Does this mean that Debian is releasing their own version of
>> Hurd?
>
> Debian uses CVS HEAD plus a number of more or less experimental patches,
> that for one reason or the other didn't make it into the official
> repository so far.
>
>> 3. Is Mach the "final" microkernel for Hurd and is Hurd using Mach 4
>> or Mach 1? - Has the microkernel been decided? - What about L4, is
>> this a candidate?
>
> Presently Hurd is using gnumach 1.3, which is a fork of Mach 4.
>
> Mach is definitely not the "final" microkernel, though it's not quite
> clear what will be. It's possible either to switch to some other
> existing microkernel, to create a new one from scratch, or to introduce
> significant changes to gnumach (effectively creating a new microkernel
> as well).
>
> However, nobody is actively working on switching to a different
> microkernel right now. The port to L4 has been abandonned because of
> technical problems with the current L4 Pistachio kernel; but some of the
> upcoming new L4 variants might be more suitable, so L4 is still a
> possible candidate.
>
> Note that there is a parallel effort to create a new system (called
> ngHurd or similar for now), which will definitely use a different
> microkernel (probably Coyotos, but not decided yet); however, it will
> have a very different design and properties, and thus can't be
> considered a direct successor to the existing Hurd implementation.
>
>> 4. What is the overall status of the entire project? - Is it going to
>> be released soon?
>
> Probably there won't be any official releases of Hurd on Mach any time
> soon, because a) nobody seems interested in tackling a release, and b)
> some people actually think it would be a bad idea.
>
> However, there are more or less regular releases of Debian GNU/Hurd.
>
> As for ngHurd, it's still in plannig state.
>
>> - Is there much contribution from the community being made?
>
> Depends on your definition of "much". There is a number of people
> contributing, but most of them only occasionally due to time
> constraints.
>
> Also depends on what kind of contribution you mean. Some people work on
> the core (microkernel, libc, system servers); some work on additional
> translators; some work on porting and packaging existing software
> (mostly for Debian); some work on the ngHurd drafts; some just do
> testing and/or help out in other ways.
>
>> 5. I would like to install and develop/for Mach and Hurd - Is there
>> any documentation somewhere on how to set it up?
>
> There are various (partially contradicting) documents available at
> debian.org/ports/hurd , hurd.gnu.org , and hurd.gnufans.org .
>
> -antrik-